Category: Wires

  • Federal Reserve cuts rates again, signals one more cut amid uncertain outlook

    Federal Reserve cuts rates again, signals one more cut amid uncertain outlook

    The Federal Reserve cut interest rates by a quarter of a percentage point on Wednesday for the third time this year, seeking to shore up a softening labor market even as inflation builds and leaving the prospect of more cuts next year unclear.

    “It’s a labor market that seems to have significant downside risks,” Fed Chair Jerome Powell said at a news conference following the meeting.

    Although Fed officials tentatively penciled in at least one more rate cut before the end of next year, estimates about where the economy is heading varied significantly and Powell suggested the central bank might wait before returning to any additional cuts.

    “We are well positioned to wait and see how the economy evolves from here,” he said.

    Wednesday’s widely expected move lowers the Fed’s benchmark rate to a range of 3.5 to 3.75 percent, the lowest level in about three years. But officials remain sharply divided over how to respond to an economy sending mixed signals: Inflation remains above the Fed’s target, which would typically argue for holding rates steady, while slower hiring and a modest uptick in unemployment suggest a case for easing.

    Investors cheered the news, with major financial indexes ending the day higher on Wednesday afternoon.

    Nine Federal Reserve officials backed Wednesday’s cut while three dissented. Two officials — Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee and Kansas City Fed President Jeffrey Schmid — favored no rate reduction, while Fed governor Stephen Miran preferred a larger, half-point cut. It was the most dissent since September 2019.

    In another sign of division among top Fed officials, the latest economic projections also released on Wednesday showed seven officials penciled in no additional cuts next year, while 12 favored at least one or more.

    Fed policies influence what households and businesses pay for mortgages, credit cards and other loans, and investors are watching closely for guidance on the central bank’s next steps.

    The Fed’s job is to keep prices stable and to maximize employment, but it is split on how to navigate what some describe as a light version of stagflation — elevated inflation alongside a labor market that is slowing but far from collapsing. Those divides were exposed at the Fed’s last gathering in October, where officials expressed “strongly differing views about what policy decision would most likely be appropriate,” according to the meeting minutes.

    Further complicating the decision, the Fed received far less official data about the health of the economy, because of the government shutdown that delayed or canceled the release of reports on the jobs market and consumer prices. Some Fed officials, relying on alternative data or surveys of the business community, argued that progress on inflation had stalled and warned that cuts risked undermining hard-won gains. Others countered that rising unemployment and weakening consumer demand suggested a need for action.

    Powell defended cutting rates now rather than waiting for the Fed’s next meeting in late January, when officials will finally have a better sense of the status of economy thanks to a trove of upcoming official reports. Wednesday’s call reflected mounting evidence of a cooling job market, he noted, saying that after readjustments and revisions, job growth may have been slightly negative since spring.

    “I think you can say that the labor market has continued to cool gradually, maybe just a touch more gradually than we thought,” Powell said.

    With unemployment rising to 4.4 percent in September, the Fed no longer characterized that rate as “low,” in a statement announcing the rate cut.

    Former Philadelphia Fed president Patrick Harker said this week that Wednesday’s move is shaping up to be a “hawkish cut” — a rate reduction paired with a signal that policymakers may soon pause further easing. Harker said the Fed’s internal divergence reflects an unusual degree of economic “fog,” with inflation not worsening as much as feared, unemployment claims relatively stable, and labor-market signals increasingly difficult to interpret. He noted that monthly job gains below 100,000 would normally be a red flag, but demographic trends and uncertain immigration patterns complicate the baseline.

    Those disagreements are unfolding amid unprecedented political pressure from President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly criticized the Fed for not moving quickly enough to lower rates and has threatened to fire Powell. Trump renewed those attacks ahead of this week’s meeting, telling Politico that support for aggressive rate cuts is a litmus test for whoever he taps to succeed Powell, whose term as chair expires in May. The president plans to nominate a successor early next year, though he has already signaled he knows who he is likely to pick.

    Former Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey, who was top Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, said he is perplexed by Trump’s push for cuts, because inflation remains above target and the broader economy continues to expand. The data shows cooling — not collapsing — labor conditions, which wouldn’t normally justify an urgent push for easing rates, Toomey said.

    Toomey warned that the president is taking a much bigger political gamble than he appears to realize. If inflation were to spike again, he said, Trump would “completely own” the fallout after pressuring the Fed when “there’s no obvious need to ease.” That makes the campaign for faster rate cuts “surprising,” Toomey said.

    Although Powell secured enough board support to approve Wednesday’s cut, future easing would depend on keeping that alliance.

    The split appears to pit a “hawkish” coalition of regional Fed presidents focused on preventing inflation from resurging against a group of governors in Washington who see the greater risk in a softening economy. Officials such as Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack, who said she would have preferred not to cut rates in October, have argued that inflation remains stubbornly above the bank’s 2 percent target and warned that reducing rates too soon could keep prices rising.

    Meanwhile, other officials continue to emphasize that a cooling labor market and softening consumer demand call for cuts, to ensure the economy does not slip further.

  • TikTok settles as social media giants face landmark trial over youth addiction claims

    TikTok settles as social media giants face landmark trial over youth addiction claims

    LOS ANGELES — TikTok agreed to settle a landmark social media addiction lawsuit just before the trial kicked off, the plaintiff’s attorneys confirmed.

    The social video platform was one of three companies — along with Meta’s Instagram and Google’s YouTube — facing claims that their platforms deliberately addict and harm children. A fourth company named in the lawsuit, Snapchat parent company Snap Inc., settled the case last week for an undisclosed sum.

    Details of the settlement with TikTok were not disclosed, and the company did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    At the core of the case is a 19-year-old identified only by the initials “KGM,” whose case could determine how thousands of other, similar lawsuits against social media companies will play out. She and two other plaintiffs have been selected for bellwether trials — essentially test cases for both sides to see how their arguments play out before a jury and what damages, if any, may be awarded, said Clay Calvert, a nonresident senior fellow of technology policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute.

    A lawyer for the plaintiff said in a statement Tuesday that TikTok remains a defendant in the other personal injury cases, and that the trial will proceed as scheduled against Meta and YouTube.

    Jury selection starts this week in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. It’s the first time the companies will argue their case before a jury, and the outcome could have profound effects on their businesses and how they will handle children using their platforms. The selection process is expected to take at least a few days, with 75 potential jurors questioned each day through at least Thursday. A fourth company named in the lawsuit, Snapchat parent company Snap Inc., settled the case last week for an undisclosed sum.

    KGM claims that her use of social media from an early age addicted her to the technology and exacerbated depression and suicidal thoughts. Importantly, the lawsuit claims that this was done through deliberate design choices made by companies that sought to make their platforms more addictive to children to boost profits. This argument, if successful, could sidestep the companies’ First Amendment shield and Section 230, which protects tech companies from liability for material posted on their platforms.

    “Borrowing heavily from the behavioral and neurobiological techniques used by slot machines and exploited by the cigarette industry, Defendants deliberately embedded in their products an array of design features aimed at maximizing youth engagement to drive advertising revenue,” the lawsuit says.

    Executives, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, are expected to testify at the trial, which will last six to eight weeks. Experts have drawn similarities to the Big Tobacco trials that led to a 1998 settlement requiring cigarette companies to pay billions in healthcare costs and restrict marketing targeting minors.

    “Plaintiffs are not merely the collateral damage of Defendants’ products,” the lawsuit says. “They are the direct victims of the intentional product design choices made by each Defendant. They are the intended targets of the harmful features that pushed them into self-destructive feedback loops.”

    The tech companies dispute the claims that their products deliberately harm children, citing a bevy of safeguards they have added over the years and arguing that they are not liable for content posted on their sites by third parties.

    “Recently, a number of lawsuits have attempted to place the blame for teen mental health struggles squarely on social media companies,” Meta said in a recent blog post. “But this oversimplifies a serious issue. Clinicians and researchers find that mental health is a deeply complex and multifaceted issue, and trends regarding teens’ well-being aren’t clear-cut or universal. Narrowing the challenges faced by teens to a single factor ignores the scientific research and the many stressors impacting young people today, like academic pressure, school safety, socio-economic challenges, and substance abuse.”

    A Meta spokesperson said in a statement Monday the company strongly disagrees with the allegations outlined in the lawsuit and that it’s “confident the evidence will show our longstanding commitment to supporting young people.”

    José Castañeda, a Google Spokesperson, said Monday that the allegations against YouTube are “simply not true.” In a statement, he said “Providing young people with a safer, healthier experience has always been core to our work.”

    TikTok did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday.

    The case will be the first in a slew of cases beginning this year that seek to hold social media companies responsible for harming children’s mental well-being. A federal bellwether trial beginning in June in Oakland, Calif., will be the first to represent school districts that have sued social media platforms over harms to children.

    In addition, more than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta, claiming it is harming young people and contributing to the youth mental health crisis by deliberately designing features on Instagram and Facebook that addict children to its platforms. The majority of cases filed their lawsuits in federal court, but some sued in their respective states.

    TikTok also faces similar lawsuits in more than a dozen states.

  • US sending ICE unit to Winter Olympics for security, prompting concern and confusion in Italy

    US sending ICE unit to Winter Olympics for security, prompting concern and confusion in Italy

    MILAN — News that a unit of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement would be present during the upcoming Winter Games has set off concern and confusion in Italy, where people have expressed outrage at the inclusion of an agency that has dominated headlines for leading the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.

    Homeland Security Investigations, a unit within ICE that focuses on cross-border crimes, frequently sends its officers to overseas events like the Olympics to assist with security. HSI officers are separate from the ICE arm at the forefront of the immigration crackdown known as Enforcement and Removal Operations, and there was no indication ERO officers were being sent to Italy.

    That distinction, however, wasn’t immediately clear to local media on Tuesday morning.

    Italy reacts to U.S. security deployment

    The reaction among some in Italy reflects not only a worsening perception abroad of the administration’s tactics on immigration but also underscores a broader rift between the U.S. under President Donald Trump and its international allies.

    Vague reports that ICE would be deployed in some capacity surfaced over the weekend, resulting in a series of online petitions gathering support of people opposed to the presence of ICE at the Games. They followed a RAI news report that aired Sunday showing an Italian news crew being threatened in Minneapolis by ICE agents. Trump’s immigration crackdown has in recent weeks intensified in Minneapolis, leading to the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens at the hands of federal immigration officers.

    Milan Mayor Giuseppe Sala said that ICE would not be welcome in his city, which is hosting the Feb. 6 opening ceremony to be attended by U.S. Vice President JD Vance, as well as most ice sports.

    “This is a militia that kills, a militia that enters into the homes of people, signing their own permission slips. It is clear they are not welcome in Milan, without a doubt,” Sala told RTL Radio 102.

    ICE units breakdown

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement is broken into various arms. Enforcement and Removal Operations is the part of the agency that is tasked with monitoring, arresting, and removing foreigners who no longer have the right to be in the U.S. They’re the officers most directly tasked with carrying out Trump’s mass deportation agenda.

    Another arm of ICE is Homeland Security Investigations. Agents from HSI conduct investigations into anything that has a cross-border nexus from human smuggling to fentanyl trafficking to smuggling of cultural artifacts. Agents from HSI are stationed in embassies around the world to facilitate their investigations and build relations with local law enforcement in those countries.

    The ICE agents deployed to Italy for the Games will have a different role from the one seen in immigration crackdowns in the U.S., officials have stressed.

    “Obviously, ICE does not conduct immigration enforcement operations in foreign countries,″ the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement Tuesday.

    “At the Olympics, ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations is supporting the U.S. Department of State’s Diplomatic Security Service and host nation to vet and mitigate risks from transnational criminal organizations. All security operations remain under Italian authority.”

    A U.S official speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss security measures said the general public likely wouldn’t even see or be aware of the HSI agents on the ground during the Olympics. The official said HSI agents would be working behind the scenes, mainly in offices or the U.S. consulate in Milan, as they have done during previous international events.

    For years HSI distanced itself from anything having to do with deportations or immigration enforcement. At one point they got new branding and email addresses to set themselves apart because agents working in parts of the country with strong political opposition to immigration enforcement wouldn’t get their emails answered because they had an ICE.gov address.

    Under the Trump administration, however, HSI agents have been working closer with ICE’s other arm — the deportation officers — to focus more on immigration issues. They’ve been going out on operations with deportation officers and focusing more on immigration fraud cases.

    Reaction underscores fraught ties

    The International Olympic Committee said in a statement that security “is the responsibility of the authorities of the host country, who work closely with the participating delegations.”

    The reaction in Italy highlights increasingly fraught relations between Trump and the U.S.’ traditional allies in Europe, which have been tested during the president’s second term over his threats to take over Greenland.

    Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani told reporters Tuesday that the ICE agents deployed for the Games will not be “those with machine guns and faces covered. They will be functionaries who belong to the anti-terrorism department.″

    Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi met in his office with U.S. Ambassador Tilman Fertitta in the late morning for a conversation that was described as cordial. The Interior Minister is Italy’s top law enforcement officials, charged with security for the Games, which is coordinated with regional prefects.

    Asked about the potential deployment over the weekend, he gave a diplomatic shrug: “I don’t see what the problem would be,″ the news agency ANSA quoted him as saying.

    Cortina Mayor Gianluca Lorenzi told the Associated Press that the municipal administrations defers to the prefecture and Italian law enforcement on matters of delegation security — which he assumes are in line with Italian guidelines.

    ———

    Barry reported from Milan. Associated Press writers Rebecca Santana and Matthew Lee contributed from Washington and Graham Dunbar from Crans-Montana, Switzerland.

  • World pauses to commemorate International Holocaust Remembrance Day

    World pauses to commemorate International Holocaust Remembrance Day

    WARSAW, Poland — Holocaust survivors, politicians, and regular people commemorated International Holocaust Remembrance Day on Tuesday, gathering at somber events across Europe and beyond to reflect on Nazi Germany’s killing of millions of people.

    International Holocaust Remembrance Day is observed across each year on Jan. 27, the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau, the most notorious of the Nazi German death camps. The U.N. General Assembly adopted a resolution in 2005 establishing the day as an annual commemoration.

    “The attempt, carried out by Nazi Germany, to erase the Jews from the face of Europe encapsulates, in an emblematic way, all the evil that human beings are capable of committing when they allow themselves to be infected — out of superficiality, indifference, cowardice, or self-interest — by the virus of hatred, racism, and oppression,” Italian President Sergio Mattarella said in a gathering with survivors in Rome.

    At Auschwitz, located in an area of southern Poland which was under German occupation during World War II, Polish President Karol Nawrocki joined survivors for a remembrance ceremony that ended with Jewish and Christian clergy reciting prayers.

    Bernard Offen, a 96-year-old survivor told participants that in today’s world he sees “signs I know too well.”

    “I see hatred resurgent. I see violence beginning to be justified once again,” Offen said. “I see people who believe their anger is more valuable than another human life. I say this because I am an old man who has seen where indifference leads to. And I say this because I believe that — I truly believe — that we can choose differently.”

    Nazi German forces killed some 1.1 million people at Auschwitz, most of them Jews, but also Poles, Roma, and others. The camp was liberated by the Soviet army on Jan. 27, 1945. In all, 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust — in ghettos, concentration camps, and shot at close range in the fields and forests of Eastern Europe.

    In the heart of Berlin, candles burned at the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, a field of 2,700 gray concrete slabs which honors the 6 million victims and stands as a powerful symbol of Germany’s remorse.

    Other countries are still struggling to come to terms with the complicity of their ancestors. Mattarella condemned the complicity of ordinary Italians in the fascist-era racial laws, which persecuted Italy’s Jewish community, and deportation of its Jews.

    As in recent years, Russia representatives were not invited to the observances at Auschwitz due to the country’s invasion of Ukraine.

    ‘Become my witness’

    Pavel Jelinek, a 90-year-old survivor from the city of Liberec — a Czech city with a prewar Jewish population of 1,350 — told those gathered in the upper house of the Czech Parliament that he was now the last living of the 37 Jews who returned to the city after the war.

    There are an estimated 196,600 Jewish Holocaust survivors still alive globally, down from 220,000 a year ago, according to the New York-based Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany. Their median age is 87, and nearly all — some 97% — are “child survivors” who were born 1928 and later, the group said.

    Though the world’s community of survivors is shrinking, some are still telling their stories for the first time after all these years.

    In Britain, King Charles and Queen Camilla held a reception for survivors. A Holocaust survivor also addressed the British Cabinet in what Prime Minister Keir Starmer described as a first. Government members wiped away tears as 95-year-old Mala Tribich described how Germany’s invasion of Poland in 1939 destroyed her childhood.

    She recalled being forced into hard labor at the age of 12 as the first Nazi ghetto was established in her hometown of Piotrkow Trybunalski, and spoke of the hunger, disease and suffering there. The Nazis killed her mother, father, and sister. She was sent to Ravensbrück and then to Bergen-Belsen, where she was liberated by the British Army in April 1945.

    She urged the Cabinet members to fight antisemitism — and to remember.

    “Soon, there will be no eyewitnesses left,” she told them. “That is why I ask you today not just to listen, but to become my witness.”

    ‘Unity that saves lives is needed’

    Many leaders also reflected on the upheaval in today’s world.

    Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, warned about rising antisemitism and new threats. She noted that AI-generated content is now being used “to blur the line between fact and fiction, distort historical truth, and undermine our collective memory.”

    Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, whose country has been under attack from Russia for four years, said that just as the world united to defeat the Nazis in 1945, it “must act the same way now.”

    “Whenever hatred and war threaten nations, unity that saves lives is needed,” Zelensky said.

  • Philip Glass pulls world premiere from Kennedy Center

    Philip Glass pulls world premiere from Kennedy Center

    Composer Philip Glass has joined the list of artists, musicians and performers pulling back from previously scheduled engagements at the Kennedy Center, withdrawing his anticipated Symphony No. 15: Lincoln from the National Symphony Orchestra, which was to perform the world premiere this coming June.

    “After thoughtful consideration, I have decided to withdraw my Symphony No. 15 Lincoln from the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts,” Glass wrote in a statement provided to the Washington Post. “Symphony No. 15 is a portrait of Abraham Lincoln, and the values of the Kennedy Center today are in direct conflict with the message of the Symphony. Therefore, I feel an obligation to withdraw this Symphony premiere from the Kennedy Center under its current leadership.”

    Glass, who will turn 89 at the end of this month, is a celebrated and influential American composer, who was awarded the Kennedy Center Honors in 2018. Though often credited as a pioneer of 20th-century minimalism, Glass’s music ranges from intimate piano études and chamber works to sprawling symphonies and ambitious, experimental operas such as Einstein on the Beach, Satyagraha and Akhnaten, about historical figures.

    Symphony No. 15: Lincoln was co-commissioned by the Kennedy Center and the NSO, and has already been subject to several delays: It was originally scheduled to premiere in March 2022 and was later postponed to October 2022. This season, the piece was restored to the NSO’s calendar as a centerpiece of the Kennedy Center’s ongoing “250 Years of Us” programming.

    Its withdrawal comes amid a wave of cancellations by artists and performers, prompted by the addition of President Donald Trump’s name to the center (as well as to the building’s facade), or attributed to scheduling conflicts or financial strains. It also lands against a backdrop of reputational crisis at the center, a stretch of politically charged changes (like Trump himself hosting the Kennedy Center Honors) that has been met with a sharp decline in ticket sales and an apparent audience boycott over the politicization of the nonpartisan venue.

    Glass’s letter arrives 188 years to the day after Abraham Lincoln delivered his 1838 Lyceum Address, from which Glass adapts two movements of the symphony’s libretto — along with Lincoln’s Autobiographical Sketch of 1859, his Farewell Address of 1861 and assorted other writings and correspondence. (Baritone Zachary James was slated to sing the premiere performance in June, on a program led by conductor Karen Kamensek.)

    “I think there is no American subject matter more interesting than Abraham Lincoln,” Glass told me in 2022 about the Symphony No. 15, then still in progress. “I read him almost like I would a writer, not a politician or someone in government. There’s a beautiful music to his writing.”

    The withdrawal mars a long history between Glass and the center. And while it’s highly unusual for a composer to withdraw a work from a commissioning body as an act of protest, the composer’s work has responded to contemporary politics in the past.

    In 2015, Washington National Opera, which this month parted ways with the Kennedy Center, gave the world premiere of an expanded version of Glass’s opera Appomattox, which draws a musical through line from the Civil War to the civil rights movement through the voices of Lincoln, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., Lyndon B. Johnson and others.

    Glass and playwright Christopher Hampton revised the opera (which premiered in 2007) in response to a 2013 decision by the Supreme Court that invalidated key elements of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

    “It’s almost like a photojournalist approach to opera,” Glass told The Post at the time, “where the material is changing while you’re writing it.”

  • More history exhibits pulled from national parks, including Grand Canyon

    More history exhibits pulled from national parks, including Grand Canyon

    Trump officials have ordered national parks to remove dozens of signs and displays related to climate change, environmental protection, and settlers’ mistreatment of Native Americans in a renewed push to implement President Donald Trump’s executive order on “restoring truth and sanity to American history.”

    Park staff have interpreted Trump’s directive — which seeks to scrub federal institutions of what it calls “partisan ideology” and remove any content deemed to “disparage Americans past or living” — to include any references to historic racism and sexism, as well as climate change and LGBTQ+ rights. Last week, that included the removal of an exhibit at the President’s House in Philadelphia that focused on George Washington’s ownership of enslaved people.

    A visitor on Thursday looks at the site where explanatory panels from an exhibit on slavery were removed from the President’s House in Philadelphia.

    In a new wave of orders this month, Trump officials instructed staff to remove or edit signs and other informational materials in at least 17 additional parks in Arizona, Texas, Colorado, Utah, Montana, and Wyoming, according to documents reviewed by the Washington Post. The documents also listed some removals ordered in August and September.

    The Interior Department said in a statement it was implementing Trump’s executive order.

    “All federal agencies are to review interpretive materials to ensure accuracy, honesty, and alignment with shared national values,” the statement said. “Following completion of the required review, the National Park Service is now taking appropriate action in accordance with the Order.”

    Among the national parks targeted in the new removal orders are some of the country’s most iconic: Grand Canyon, Glacier, Big Bend, and Zion.

    The removal orders include descriptions of how climate change is driving the disappearance of the glaciers at Glacier National Park and a wayside display at the Grand Canyon referring to the forced removal of Native Americans.

    The administration’s broad attempt to suppress true stories “should offend every American,” said Kristen Brengel, senior vice president of government affairs for the National Parks Conservation Association.

    Brengel emphasized that Park Service staffers are acting on administration orders. “Everyone understands this history,” she said. “It’s not debatable, but they’re being forced to select stories because they think the administration will threaten their jobs if they don’t.”

    Here are details on some of the changes being ordered at national parks.

    Grand Canyon National Park

    Staff at a Grand Canyon visitor center in Arizona removed part of an exhibit after flagging potentially problematic passages to the national park system’s leadership in D.C., according to documentation reviewed by the Post.

    The passages included text stating that settlers “exploited land for mining and grazing” and that federal officials “pushed tribes off their land” to establish the park.

    The park also removed references to cattle ranchers “carelessly overgrazing” the land, tourists “foolishly” leaving trash in the park and entrepreneurs who “profited excessively” from tourism.

    Trump officials have yet to take action on several other items, including a video about Native American history.

    Park staff suggested fixes that would remove a reference to a federal policy that prevented Native Americans from using body and face paint, as well as references to their ancestors’ “misery, suffering,” and “loss.”

    Roadside displays on climate change, pollution and mining were also flagged for possible removal.

    Glacier National Park

    In response to frequent inquiries from visitors about the potential disappearance of the famous glaciers at Montana’s Glacier National Park, staff created signs and other resources to answer those questions, said Jeff Mow, who retired as superintendent of the park in 2022.

    The administration flagged one brochure for removal or changes that shows images of glaciers retreating and explains that human-caused climate change is a factor in their likely future disappearance. A video that refers to the disappearance of the glaciers was also ordered removed or changed.

    Also flagged was a sign at the park’s gift shop that says: “Climate Change Affects National Parks and the Treasures They Protect.”

    “We’re whitewashing or we’re taking out all those sort of not-so-nice stories that have occurred in our nation’s history,” Mow said.

    Another informational display to be removed or changed describes the park’s issues with air pollution. The administration paused air-quality monitoring at national parks last year.

    Other signs talk about the increasing fire risk at the park, as well as a nearby dam that “flooded two lakes within the park.”

    “As the nation’s storyteller of natural and cultural history, the National Park Service takes great pride” in telling these stories, Mow said. “This process of being edited — it’s like taking a torpedo in the bow.

    Big Bend National Park

    The signs slated for removal at Big Bend National Park along the Texas-Mexico border do not reference the topics, such as climate or Native American history, that have typically attracted the attention of Trump officials.

    Instead, of the nearly 20 signs flagged for not conforming with the new policy, many deal with geology, prehistoric history, fossils and other seemingly uncontroversial scientific or historical topics. The removal orders do not spell out what’s wrong with the signs.

    Some of the displays are in Spanish and English, while others talk about cooperating with Mexico on modern preservation efforts.

    Big Bend’s submission for the administration’s review says, “These wayside exhibits describe natural features, but emphasize ‘matters unrelated to the beauty, abundance, or grandeur of said natural feature.’” Although it flagged the materials for review, the park said it did “not advocate changing these wayside exhibits.”

    Even so, Trump officials decided the displays did not conform with administration policy and ordered them changed or removed.

    “This is not something that the National Park Service should be blamed for,” said Bob Krumenaker, superintendent of Big Bend until 2023. “They are being told they have to do these things. And my hope is they’re saving these exhibits for when things change so they can put them back up.

    Other parks

    The administration also targeted less famous parks. One sign slated for removal at Bent’s Old Fort National Historic Site in Colorado described key figures in the site’s history and included references to the forced removal of a Native tribe, a family’s slave ownership and another historic figure who had a miscarriage.

    At Hubbell Trading Post National Historic Site in Arizona, a panel on Ganado Mucho, a Navajo leader known for settling disputes with ranchers, is also listed for changes or removal.

    The documentation reviewed by the Post also included new details on removals and changes that were ordered last year.

    At Arizona’s Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, descriptions of destructive grazing practices and the accelerating rate of warming since 1850, as well as a booklet that talks about endangered turtles and Sonoran pronghorn, were ordered changed or removed.

    Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming was ordered to remove or change a panel about Gustavus Cheyney Doane that said he participated in the U.S. Army massacre of Piegan Blackfeet Native Americans, including women, children and the elderly.

    At Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument in Montana, exhibit text that described the United States being “hungry for gold and land” and breaking promises to Native Americans was ordered changed or removed.

    Another text describing how U.S.-run boarding schools for Indigenous children “violently erased cultural identities and language” was also deemed not to comply with Trump’s policy.

    Brengel of the National Parks Conservation Association said the Trump administration’s efforts to sanitize American history runs counter to the mission of the park system.

    “We are capable of hearing about our tragedies and our victories, and this systematic erasure should concern everyone in our country,” she said.

  • Minneapolis shooting scrambles Second Amendment politics for Trump

    Minneapolis shooting scrambles Second Amendment politics for Trump

    Prominent Republicans and gun rights advocates helped elicit a White House turnabout this week after bristling over the administration’s characterization of Alex Pretti, the second person killed this month by a federal officer in Minneapolis, as responsible for his own death because he lawfully possessed a weapon.

    The death produced no clear shifts in U.S. gun politics or policies, even as President Donald Trump shuffles the lieutenants in charge of his militarized immigration crackdown. But important voices in Trump’s coalition have called for a thorough investigation of Pretti’s death while also criticizing inconsistencies in some Republicans’ Second Amendment stances.

    If the dynamic persists, it could give Republicans problems as Trump heads into a midterm election year with voters already growing skeptical of his overall immigration approach. The concern is acute enough that Trump’s top spokeswoman sought Monday to reassert his brand as a staunch gun rights supporter.

    “The president supports the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens, absolutely,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters.

    Leavitt qualified that “when you are bearing arms and confronted by law enforcement, you are raising … the risk of force being used against you.”

    Videos contradict early statements from administration

    That still marked a retreat from the administration’s previous messages about the shooting of Pretti. It came the same day the president dispatched border czar Tom Homan to Minnesota, seemingly elevating him over Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Border Patrol chief Greg Bovino, who had been in charge in Minneapolis.

    Within hours of Pretti’s death on Saturday, Bovino suggested Pretti “wanted to … massacre law enforcement,” and Noem said Pretti was “brandishing” a weapon and acted “violently” toward officers.

    “I don’t know of any peaceful protester that shows up with a gun and ammunition rather than a sign,” Noem said.

    White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, an architect of Trump’s mass deportation effort, went further on X, declaring Pretti “an assassin.”

    Bystander videos contradicted each claim, instead showing Pretti holding a cellphone and helping a woman who had been pepper sprayed by a federal officer. Within seconds, Pretti was sprayed, too, and taken to the ground by multiple officers. No video disclosed thus far has shown him unholstering his concealed weapon -– which he had a Minnesota permit to carry. It appeared that one officer took Pretti’s gun and walked away with it just before shots began.

    As multiple videos went viral online and on television, Vice President JD Vance reposted Miller’s assessment, while Trump shared an alleged photo of “the gunman’s gun, loaded (with two additional full magazines!).”

    On Tuesday, Trump was asked if he agreed with Miller’s comment describing Pretti as an “assassin” and answered “no.” But he added that protesters “can’t have guns” and said he wants the death investigated.

    “You can’t walk in with guns, you just can’t,” Trump told reporters on the White House lawn before departing for a trip to Iowa.

    Swift reactions from gun rights advocates

    The National Rifle Association, which has backed Trump three times, released a statement that began by casting blame on Minnesota Democrats it accused of stoking protests. But the group lashed out after a federal prosecutor in California said on X that, “If you approach law enforcement with a gun, there is a high likelihood they will be legally justified in shooting you.”

    That analysis, the NRA said, is “dangerous and wrong.”

    FBI Director Kash Patel magnified the blowback Sunday on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures With Maria Bartiromo.” No one, Patel said, can “bring a firearm, loaded, with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want. It’s that simple.”

    Erich Pratt, vice president of Gun Owners of America, was incredulous.

    “I have attended protest rallies while armed, and no one got injured,” he said on CNN.

    Conservative officials around the country made the same connection between the First and Second amendments.

    “Showing up at a protest is very American. Showing up with a weapon is very American,” state Rep. Jeremy Faison, who leads the GOP caucus in Tennessee, said on X.

    Trump’s first-term vice president, Mike Pence, called for “full and transparent investigation of this officer involved shooting.”

    A different response from the past

    Liberals, conservatives and nonpartisan experts noted how the administration’s response differed from past conservative positions involving protests and weapons.

    Multiple Trump supporters were found to have weapons during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Trump issued blanket pardons to all of them.

    Republicans were critical in 2020 when Mark and Patricia McCloskey had to pay fines after pointing guns at protesters who marched through their St. Louis neighborhood after the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. And then there’s Kyle Rittenhouse, a counter-protester acquitted after fatally shooting two men and injuring another in Kenosha, Wisconsin, during the post-Floyd protests.

    “You remember Kyle Rittenhouse and how he was made a hero on the right,” Trey Gowdy, a Republican former congressman and attorney for Trump during one of his first-term impeachments. “Alex Pretti’s firearm was being lawfully carried. … He never brandished it.”

    Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor who has studied the history of the gun debate, said the fallout “shows how tribal we’ve become.” Republicans spent years talking about the Second Amendment as a means to fight government tyranny, he said.

    “The moment someone who’s thought to be from the left, they abandon that principled stance,” Winkler said.

    Meanwhile, Democrats who have criticized open and concealed carry laws for years, Winkler added, are not amplifying that position after Pretti’s death.

    Uncertain effects in an election year

    The blowback against the administration from core Trump supporters comes as Republicans are trying to protect their threadbare majority in the U.S. House and face several competitive Senate races.

    Perhaps reflecting the stakes, GOP staff and campaign aides were reticent Monday to talk about the issue at all.

    The House Republican campaign chairman, Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina, is sponsoring the GOP’s most significant gun legislation of this congressional term, a proposal to make state concealed-carry permits reciprocal across all states.

    The bill cleared the House Judiciary Committee last fall. Asked Monday whether Pretti’s death and the Minneapolis protests might affect debate, an aide to Speaker Mike Johnson did not offer any update on the bill’s prospects.

    Gun rights advocates have notched many legislative victories in Republican-controlled statehouses in recent decades, from rolling back gun-free zones around schools and churches to expanding gun possession rights in schools, on university campuses and in other public spaces.

    William Sack, legal director of the Second Amendment Foundation, said he was surprised and disappointed by the administration’s initial statements following the Pretti shooting. Trump’s vacillating, he said, is “very likely to cost them dearly with the core of a constituency they count on.”

  • Trump’s use of AI images pushes new boundaries, further eroding public trust, experts say

    Trump’s use of AI images pushes new boundaries, further eroding public trust, experts say

    LOS ANGELES — The Trump administration has not shied away from sharing AI-generated imagery online, embracing cartoonlike visuals and memes and promoting them on official White House channels.

    But an edited — and realistic — image of civil rights attorney Nekima Levy Armstrong in tears after being arrested is raising new alarms about how the administration is blurring the lines between what is real and what is fake.

    Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s account posted the original image from Levy Armstrong’s arrest before the official White House account posted an altered image that showed her crying. The doctored picture is part of a deluge of AI-edited imagery that has been shared across the political spectrum since the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by U.S. Border Patrol officers in Minneapolis

    However, the White House’s use of artificial intelligence has troubled misinformation experts who fear the spreading of AI-generated or edited images erodes public perception of the truth and sows distrust.

    In response to criticism of the edited image of Levy Armstrong, White House officials doubled down on the post, with deputy communications director Kaelan Dorr writing on X that the “memes will continue.” White House Deputy Press Secretary Abigail Jackson also shared a post mocking the criticism.

    David Rand, a professor of information science at Cornell University, says calling the altered image a meme “certainly seems like an attempt to cast it as a joke or humorous post, like their prior cartoons. This presumably aims to shield them from criticism for posting manipulated media.” He said the purpose of sharing the altered arrest image seems “much more ambiguous” than the cartoonish images the administration has shared in the past.

    Memes have always carried layered messages that are funny or informative to people who understand them, but indecipherable to outsiders. AI-enhanced or edited imagery is just the latest tool the White House uses to engage the segment of Trump’s base that spends a lot of time online, said Zach Henry, a Republican communications consultant who founded Total Virality, an influencer marketing firm.

    “People who are terminally online will see it and instantly recognize it as a meme,” he said. “Your grandparents may see it and not understand the meme, but because it looks real, it leads them to ask their kids or grandkids about it.”

    All the better if it prompts a fierce reaction, which helps it go viral, said Henry, who generally praised the work of the White House’s social media team.

    The creation and dissemination of altered images, especially when they are shared by credible sources, “crystallizes an idea of what’s happening, instead of showing what is actually happening,” said Michael A. Spikes, a professor at Northwestern University and news media literacy researcher.

    “The government should be a place where you can trust the information, where you can say it’s accurate, because they have a responsibility to do so,” he said. ”By sharing this kind of content, and creating this kind of content … it is eroding the trust — even though I’m always kind of skeptical of the term trust — but the trust we should have in our federal government to give us accurate, verified information. It’s a real loss, and it really worries me a lot.”

    Spikes said he already sees the “institutional crises” around distrust in news organizations and higher education, and feels this behavior from official channels inflames those issues.

    Ramesh Srinivasan, a professor at UCLA and the host of the Utopias podcast, said many people are now questioning where they can turn to for “trustable information.” “AI systems are only going to exacerbate, amplify and accelerate these problems of an absence of trust, an absence of even understanding what might be considered reality or truth or evidence,” he said.

    Srinivasan said he feels the White House and other officials sharing AI-generated content not only invites everyday people to continue to post similar content but also grants permission to others who are in positions of credibility and power, like policymakers, to share unlabeled synthetic content. He added that given that social media platforms tend to “algorithmically privilege” extreme and conspiratorial content — which AI generation tools can create with ease — “we’ve got a big, big set of challenges on our hands.”

    An influx of AI-generated videos related to Immigration and Customs Enforcement action, protests and interactions with citizens has already been proliferating on social media. After Renee Good was shot by an ICE officer while she was in her car, several AI-generated videos began circulating of women driving away from ICE officers who told them to stop. There are also many fabricated videos circulating of immigration raids and of people confronting ICE officers, often yelling at them or throwing food in their faces.

    Jeremy Carrasco, a content creator who specializes in media literacy and debunking viral AI videos, said the bulk of these videos are likely coming from accounts that are “engagement farming,” or looking to capitalize on clicks by generating content with popular keywords and search terms like ICE. But he also said the videos are getting views from people who oppose ICE and DHS and could be watching them as “fan fiction,” or engaging in “wishful thinking,” hoping that they’re seeing real pushback against the organizations and their officers.

    Still, Carrasco also believes that most viewers can’t tell if what they’re watching is fake, and questions whether they would know “what’s real or not when it actually matters, like when the stakes are a lot higher.”

    Even when there are blatant signs of AI generation, like street signs with gibberish on them or other obvious errors, only in the “best-case scenario” would a viewer be savvy enough or be paying enough attention to register the use of AI.

    This issue is, of course, not limited to news surrounding immigration enforcement and protests. Fabricated and misrepresented images following the capture of deposed Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro exploded online earlier this month. Experts, including Carrasco, think the spread of AI-generated political content will only become more commonplace.

    Carrasco believes that the widespread implementation of a watermarking system that embeds information about the origin of a piece of media into its metadata layer could be a step toward a solution. The Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity has developed such a system, but Carrasco doesn’t think that will become extensively adopted for at least another year.

    “It’s going to be an issue forever now,” he said. I don’t think people understand how bad this is.”

  • Activists say Iran’s crackdown has killed at least 6,159 people

    Activists say Iran’s crackdown has killed at least 6,159 people

    DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — Iran’s bloody crackdown on nationwide protests has killed at least 6,159 people while many others still are feared dead, activists said Tuesday, as a U.S. aircraft carrier group arrived in the Middle East to lead any American military response to the crisis. Iran’s currency, the rial, meanwhile fell to a record low of 1.5 million to $1.

    The arrival of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier and guided missile destroyers accompanying it provide the U.S. the ability to strike Iran, particularly as Gulf Arab states have signaled they want to stay out of any attack despite hosting American military personnel.

    Two Iranian-backed militias in the Mideast have signaled their willingness to launch new attacks, likely trying to back Iran after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened military action over the killing of peaceful protesters or Tehran launching mass executions in the wake of the demonstrations.

    Iran has repeatedly threatened to drag the entire Mideast into a war, though its air defenses and military are still reeling after the June war launched by Israel against the country. But the pressure on its economy may spark new unrest as everyday goods slowly go out of reach of its people — particularly if Trump chooses to attack.

    Ambrey, a private security firm, issued a notice Tuesday saying it assessed that the U.S. “has positioned sufficient military capability to conduct kinetic operations against Iran while maintaining the ability to defend itself and regional allies from reciprocal action.”

    “Supporting or avenging Iranian protesters in punitive strikes is assessed as insufficient justification for sustained military conflict,” Ambrey wrote. “However, alternative objectives, such as the degradation of Iranian military capabilities, may increase the likelihood of limited U.S. intervention.”

    Activists offer new death toll

    Tuesday’s new figures came from the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency, which has been accurate in multiple rounds of unrest in Iran. The group verifies each death with a network of activists on the ground in Iran.

    It said the 6,159 dead included at least 5,804 protesters, 214 government-affiliated forces, 92 children and 49 civilians who weren’t demonstrating. The crackdown has seen over 41,800 arrests, it added.

    The Associated Press has been unable to independently assess the death toll given authorities cutting off the internet and disrupting calls into the Islamic Republic.

    Iran’s government has put the death toll at a far lower 3,117, saying 2,427 were civilians and security forces, and labeled the rest “terrorists.” In the past, Iran’s theocracy has undercounted or not reported fatalities from unrest.

    That death toll exceeds that of any other round of protest or unrest there in decades, and recalls the chaos surrounding Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution.

    The protests in Iran began on Dec. 28, sparked by the fall of the Iranian currency, the rial, and quickly spread across the country. They were met by a violent crackdown by Iran’s theocracy, the scale of which is only starting to become clear as the country has faced more than two weeks of internet blackout — the most comprehensive in its history.

    Iran’s U.N. ambassador told a U.N. Security Council meeting late Monday that Trump’s repeated threats to use military force against the country “are neither ambiguous nor misinterpreted.” Amir Saeid Iravani also repeated allegations that the U.S. leader incited violence by “armed terrorist groups” supported by the United States and Israel, but gave no evidence to support his claims.

    Iranian state media has tried to accuse forces abroad for the protests as the theocracy remains broadly unable to address the country’s ailing economy, which is still squeezed by international sanctions, particularly over its nuclear program.

    On Tuesday, exchange shops offered the record-low rial-to-dollar rate in Tehran. Traders declined to speak publicly on the matter, with several responding angrily to the situation.

    Already, Iran has vastly limited its subsidized currency rates to cut down on corruption. It also has offered the equivalent of $7 a month to most people in the country to cover rising costs. However, Iran’s people have seen the rial fall from a rate of 32,000 to $1 just a decade ago — which has devoured the value of their savings.

    Some Iranian-backed militias suggest willingness to fight

    Iran projected its power across the Mideast through the “Axis of Resistance,” a network of proxy militant groups in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria and Iraq, and other places. It was also seen as a defensive buffer, intended to keep conflict away from Iranian borders. But it has collapsed after Israel targeted Hamas, Hezbollah in Lebanon and others during the Gaza war. Meanwhile, rebels in 2024 overthrew Syria’s Bashar Assad after a yearslong, bloody war in which Iran backed his rule.

    Yemen’s Houthi rebels, backed by Iran, have repeatedly warned they could resume fire if needed on shipping in the Red Sea, releasing old footage of a previous attack Monday. Ahmad “Abu Hussein” al-Hamidawi, the leader of Iraq’s Kataib Hezbollah militia, warned “the enemies that the war on the (Islamic) Republic will not be a picnic; rather, you will taste the bitterest forms of death, and nothing will remain of you in our region.”

    The Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, one of Iran’s staunchest allies, refused to say how it planned to react in the case of a possible attack.

    “During the past two months, several parties have asked me a clear and frank question: If Israel and America go to war against Iran, will Hezbollah intervene or not?” Hezbollah leader Sheikh Naim Kassem said in a video address.

    He said the group is preparing for “possible aggression and is determined to defend” against it. But as to how it would act, he said, “these details will be determined by the battle and we will determine them according to the interests that are present.”

  • Trump administration’s immigration crackdown contributed to a drop in the U.S. growth rate last year

    Trump administration’s immigration crackdown contributed to a drop in the U.S. growth rate last year

    ORLANDO, Fla. — President Donald Trump’s crackdown on immigration contributed to a year-to-year drop in the nation’s growth rate as the U.S. population reached nearly 342 million people in 2025, according to population estimates released Tuesday by the U.S. Census Bureau.

    The 0.5% growth rate for 2025 was a sharp drop from 2024’s almost 1% growth rate, which was the highest in two decades and was fueled by immigration. The 2024 estimates put the U.S. population at 340 million people.

    Immigration increased by almost 1.3 million people last year, compared with 2024’s increase of almost 2.8 million people. If trends continue, the annual gain from immigrants by mid-2026 will drop to only 321,000 people, according to the Census Bureau, whose estimates do not distinguish between legal and illegal immigration.

    In the past 125 years, the lowest growth rate was in 2021, during the height of the coronavirus pandemic, when the U.S. population grew by just 0.16%, or 522,000 people and immigration increased by just 376,000 people because of travel restrictions into the U.S. Before that, the lowest growth rate was just under 0.5% in 1919 at the height of the Spanish flu.

    Births outnumbered deaths last year by 519,000 people. While higher than the pandemic-era low at the beginning of the decade, the natural increase was dramatically smaller than in the 2000s, when it ranged between 1.6 million and 1.9 million people.

    Lower immigration stunts growth in many states

    The immigration drop dented growth in several states that traditionally have been immigrant magnets.

    California had a net population loss of 9,500 people in 2025, a stark change from the previous year, when it gained 232,000 residents, even though roughly the same number of Californians already living in the state moved out in both years. The difference was immigration since the number of net immigrants who moved into the state dropped from 361,000 people in 2024 to 109,000 in 2025.

    Florida had year-to-year drops in both immigrants and people moving in from other states. The Sunshine State, which has become more expensive in recent years from surging property values and higher home insurance costs, had only 22,000 domestic migrants in 2025, compared with 64,000 people in 2024, and the net number of immigrants dropped from more than 411,000 people to 178,000 people.

    New York added only 1,008 people in 2025, mostly because the state’s net migration from immigrants dropped from 207,000 people to 95,600 people.

    South Carolina, Idaho, and North Carolina had the highest year-over-year growth rates, ranging from 1.3% to 1.5%. Texas, Florida, and North Carolina added the most people in pure numbers. California, Hawaii, New Mexico, Vermont, and West Virginia had population declines.

    The South, which has been the powerhouse of growth in the 2020s, continued to add more people than any other region, but the numbers dropped from 1.7 million people in 2024 to 1.1 million in 2025.

    “Many of these states are going to show even smaller growth when we get to next year,” Brookings demographer William Frey said Tuesday.

    The effects of Trump’s immigration crackdown

    Tuesday’s data release comes as researchers have been trying to determine the effects of the second Trump administration’s immigration crackdown after the Republican president returned to the White House in January 2025. Trump made a surge of migrants at the southern border a central issue in his winning 2024 presidential campaign.

    The numbers made public Tuesday reflect change from July 2024 to July 2025, covering the end of President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration and the first half of Trump’s first year back in office.

    The figures capture a period that reflects the beginning of enforcement surges in Los Angeles and Portland, Ore., but do not capture the impact on immigration after the Trump administration’s crackdowns began in Chicago; New Orleans; Memphis, Tennessee; and Minneapolis, Minn..

    The 2025 numbers were a jarring divergence from 2024, when net international migration accounted for 84% of the nation’s 3.3 million-person increase from the year before. The jump in immigration two years ago was partly because of a new method of counting that added people who were admitted for humanitarian reasons.

    “They do reflect recent trends we have seen in out-migration, where the numbers of people coming in is down and the numbers going out is up,” Eric Jensen, a senior research scientist at the Census Bureau, said last week.

    How the population estimates are calculated

    Unlike the once-a-decade census, which determines how many congressional seats and Electoral College votes each state gets, as well as the distribution of $2.8 trillion in annual government funding, the population estimates are calculated from government records and internal Census Bureau data.

    The release of the 2025 population estimates was delayed by the federal government shutdown last fall and comes at a challenging time for the Census Bureau and other U.S. statistical agencies. The bureau, which is the largest statistical agency in the U.S., lost about 15% of its workforce last year due to buyouts and layoffs that were part of cost-cutting efforts by the White House and its Department of Government Efficiency.

    Other recent actions by the Trump administration, such as the firing of Erika McEntarfer as Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner, have raised concerns about political meddling at U.S. statistical agencies. But Frey said the bureau’s staffers appear to have been “doing this work as usual without interference.”

    “So I have no reason to doubt the numbers that come out,” Frey said.