Inquirer.com – Zurich DR

Category: Nation World News Wires

  • Retrofitted Qatari jet takes flight as Air Force One for Trump’s trip to North Dakota

    WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Wednesday took his maiden voyage on a new Air Force One — a retrofitted Boeing 747 worth $400 million gifted by Qatar that embeds his personality more deeply into the institution of the American presidency.

    Gone is the trademark light blue hull that helped Air Force One blend into the sky. The refurbished jet is painted to Trump’s preferred color scheme of a navy blue belly and red and gold stripes.

    It has the luxury features that the president believes a commander-in-chief’s entourage should have — plush carpets, lie-flat seats, wood paneling, and a presidential seal on the seat belts, according to reported tours of the plane.

    Trump told reporters that he was proud of the luxurious plane. “You can do two things: You can low-key it, or you can show it,” he said.

    Reporters are generally not permitted to take photographs on the plane unless Trump is present. But on Wednesday, Trump administration staffers posted images of the plane’s interior on social media.

    White House communications director Steven Cheung posted a photo of aides gathered around a circular table that had off-white place mats and leather captain’s chairs. Monica Crowley, the chief of U.S. protocol, posted a picture of herself perched on a leather couch between a pair of Air Force One throw pillows. Mounted on the wall behind her was a framed photo of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial.

    The jet carried Trump to North Dakota to see the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library, the first official visitor ahead of its opening on the nation’s 250th anniversary.

    The jet, a gift from the Middle Eastern power, raised ethical concerns, but Trump saw the plane as a necessary replacement to the 35-year-old planes that had previously ferried him as president.

    “This is a gift from a country that has treated us very well,” Trump said.

    The new jet will only temporarily be in the nation’s service only temporarily, as Boeing is expected to deliver in 2028 long-delayed planes that will permanently serve as Air Force One. Trump, a Republican, has said in the past that the Qatar plane would end up in a presidential library.

    The Air Force has said that it did little to change the cabin layout of the plane and that it spent less than $400 million on security upgrades.

  • Pope promotes Italian nun to top migrant role in his first major appointment of a woman to Holy See

    ROME — Pope Leo XIV on Tuesday made his first major appointment of a woman to the Holy See hierarchy, promoting Italian Sister Alessandra Smerilli to head the Vatican office responsible for migrants, the environment, and development.

    Smerilli, an economist, is currently the No. 2 in the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development. As prefect, she replaces the retiring Canadian Cardinal Michael Czerny, who turns 80 this month.

    With the appointment of Smerilli, Leo appears to be following suit of his predecessor, Pope Francis, who made a point of promoting women to top-level management positions within the Holy See as part of his response to calls by women for greater decision-making roles in the church.

    But Leo too is following Francis’ lead by simultaneously naming Cardinal Fabio Baggio as a “pro-prefect” of the office, where he is currently undersecretary.

    The dual nominations recognize that sometimes the role of a Vatican department head requires being an ordained priest and cardinal.

    Baggio was also given the mandate to head up the Vatican’s Borgo Laudato Si environmental educational center, at Castel Gandolfo, near Rome.

    The Catholic Church reserves the priesthood for men, and women have long complained of a second-class status despite carrying out the lion’s share of the church’s work running schools and hospitals and passing the faith on to younger generations.

  • Congo bans gatherings in areas far from Ebola outbreak. Some say it limits dissent

    Congo bans gatherings in areas far from Ebola outbreak. Some say it limits dissent

    KINSHASA, Congo — Opposition and civil society groups are protesting Congo’s new ban on public demonstrations and mass gatherings in the capital and other areas far from the country’s deadly Ebola outbreak, alleging that the decision aims to limit freedom of speech.

    The decision announced over the weekend came as the outbreak of a type of Ebola with no approved treatment or vaccine continues to grow, with 1,307 people infected and 377 dead across three provinces in eastern Congo. It could be the worst Ebola outbreak yet.

    Congo’s ministry of interior on Saturday said gatherings and demonstrations were forbidden in the provinces of Kinshasa, Tshopo, Haut-Uele, and Bas-Uele as fears grow about the outbreak spilling into new areas. None of the provinces have any confirmed cases.

    Separately, the mayor of ​Goma, eastern Congo’s largest city and now under the control of the Rwanda-backed M23 rebel group, also banned public gatherings and demonstrations, including celebrations linked to sports events, on Monday. Congo is in its first World Cup in over half a century.

    Congo’s political opposition has denounced the ban as unconstitutional. Prince Epenge, the spokesperson for the Lamuka coalition, has said the ban aims to prevent a planned demonstration in the capital, Kinshasa, early next month. The protest is against proposed constitutional changes that would allow Congo’s President Felix Tshisekedi to run for a third term.

    Civil society organizations also condemned the ban in a statement on Monday, citing freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.

    In a televised address on Monday evening, Tshisekedi announced a $319 million response plan to the Ebola outbreak, and called on people to respect health guidelines, report suspected cases, and not give in to misinformation. He did not directly address the bans.

    “Ebola is neither a rumor nor a source of shame,” Tshisekedi said. “It is a health emergency that demands responsibility, solidarity, and truth.”

    Health workers have reported some skepticism and attacks over Ebola from residents in the affected areas of Ituri, North Kivu, and South Kivu provinces.

    Cases also have been confirmed in neighboring Uganda, as well as one in France in a doctor who returned from Congo.

    The United Nations ​warned in a report on Tuesday that if the virus spreads into other neighboring countries, including Rwanda and Angola, it could cost Africa up to $3.6 billion and result in 328,000 job losses.

    More than a month into the outbreak, officials believe it continues to outpace response efforts and no one knows its true scale. They are yet to identify patient zero and struggle to trace contact cases.

    The World Health Organization has warned that violence from rebels in eastern Congo is complicating the response to the outbreak. In Ituri, attacks by the Islamic State group-backed Allied Democratic Force have cut off access to many villages and forced people to flee their homes, adding to already overcrowded camps of people displaced by years of conflict.

  • What the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Cook case means for Federal Reserve independence

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday said the Federal Reserve, unlike any other agency in Washington, has a measure of independence from the presidency and day-to-day politics. But the court didn’t define to what extent.

    The case is the latest round in an unprecedented fight between the Fed and President Donald Trump. More political interference at the Fed could upend financial markets around the world, which closely follow its interest rate moves.

    Trump has repeatedly demanded that the central bank cut its key interest rate to lower borrowing costs for homeowners, businesses, and even the government itself. Trump sought to fire a Fed governor, Lisa Cook, last August after accusing her of mortgage fraud — a charge she denies. Cook was appointed by former President Joe Biden and removing her would give Trump the opportunity to name a more amenable official in her place.

    In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled that the president cannot fire the seven members of the Fed’s board of governors without a clear cause. The decision endorses the Fed’s independent structure even as the court eliminated such protections for leaders of other agencies, including the Federal Trade Commission, whom the president can fire at-will.

    “That’s a big deal,” said Scott Alvarez, the central bank’s former top lawyer. “That’s one of the things that makes the Fed independent.”

    While the decision is a boost for the Fed, it does leave Cook vulnerable to further attempts by the Trump administration to fire her. Trump said on his social media site, Truth Social, that “we will take appropriate action immediately” to remove Cook. But for now, she will keep her job while the case is fought in lower courts.

    The court said the Fed’s independent structure is constitutional

    In a separate case Monday, the justices ruled 6-3 that the Constitution allows the president to fire the heads of federal agencies that had previously been considered independent. But in the Cook case, the court carved out a clear exemption for the Fed.

    The Fed has a “unique historical status and role,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, similar to the First and Second Banks of the United States that existed in the early 1800s and that operated “at a deliberate remove from the ordinary political process.”

    If the president could fire a Fed governor for any reason, it would undermine that official’s ability to make decisions independently, Roberts wrote.

    The ruling provides some additional protection for new chair Kevin Warsh, who was nominated by Trump but has said that getting inflation back to the Fed’s 2% target is his top priority. About half the Fed’s policymakers support a rate hike to achieve that goal, while Trump has spoken out against hikes.

    Still, Kathryn Judge, a law professor at Columbia University, said the justices’ decision to strike down the independence of other agencies erodes the Fed’s standing by leaving it as the only remaining such body in Washington. The principle of independent, non-political judgment has been undercut, she added.

    “Fed independence lives on for another day, but is not as robust as it was prior to these decisions,” she said.

    Cook and other governors are still vulnerable

    And the court did not fully close the door on Trump’s efforts to fire Cook. Trump’s lawyers accepted that Trump could only fire her “for cause,” but they argued that the White House could define the cause and it couldn’t be second-guessed by courts.

    The Supreme Court instead said that “for cause” likely involved serious misconduct that wasn’t related to their professional duties, but didn’t provide much detail. More importantly, they also threw out the higher standard that Cook’s lawyers had pushed, which would have allowed governors to only be fired for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance on the job. Since the alleged mortgage fraud occurred before she joined the Fed, such a standard would have likely shut down the case.

    The court also said that Cook had to be given formal notice of her firing — the president only announced it last August on Truth Social — and an opportunity to formally respond, though the court did not specify what the process should look like. Indeed, Roberts included a footnote in his opinion noting that nothing forbids Trump from “trying again” to fire her, provided she is given proper notice and a chance to contest it.

    Why the Fed’s independence matters

    The court battle will likely further define the boundaries of Fed independence.

    The Fed wields extensive power over the U.S. economy. By cutting the short-term interest rate it controls — which it typically does when the economy falters — the Fed can make borrowing cheaper and encourage more spending, accelerating growth and hiring. When it raises the rate — which it does to cool the economy and combat inflation — it can weaken the economy and cause job losses.

    Economists have long preferred independent central banks because they can more easily take unpopular steps to fight inflation, such as raise interest rates, which makes borrowing to buy a home, car, or appliances more expensive.

    The importance of an independent Fed was cemented for most economists after the extended inflation spike of the 1970s and early 1980s. Former Fed Chair Arthur Burns has been widely blamed for allowing the painful inflation of that era to accelerate by succumbing to pressure from President Richard Nixon to keep rates low heading into the 1972 election. Nixon feared higher rates would cost him the election, which he won in a landslide.

    Paul Volcker was eventually appointed chair of the Fed in 1979 by President Jimmy Carter, and he pushed the Fed’s short-term rate to the stunningly high level of nearly 20%. (It is currently 3.6%.) The eye-popping rates triggered a sharp recession, pushed unemployment to nearly 11%, and spurred widespread protests.

    Yet Volcker didn’t flinch. By the mid-1980s, inflation had fallen back into the low single digits. Volcker’s willingness to inflict pain on the economy to throttle inflation is seen by most economists as a key example of the value of an independent Fed.

  • Democrats in half of states sue Trump administration over Medicaid work rules

    NEW YORK — Democrats in 25 states and the District of Columbia on Monday sued the Trump administration over its recent guidance on new Medicaid work requirements, arguing the strict rules will prevent eligible Americans from accessing the care they need.

    The attorneys general and governors who filed the lawsuit allege that an interim final rule released earlier this month by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services oversteps the text of the law last summer that set in motion the changes to Medicaid.

    They claim the Republican administration’s narrow interpretation of parts of the statute, including new limits to a medical frailty exemption, will create harmful coverage barriers and chaos in states that have been rushing to implement new systems by the January deadline.

    “Added administrative burdens will cause individuals who are eligible for Medicaid to lose or be denied coverage,” the plaintiffs write. “People with disabilities, patients in the middle of cancer treatment, or those struggling with another serious or complex health condition, shouldn’t be at risk of losing the care that helps maintain their health.”

    Spokespeople for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and CMS, the agencies named in the lawsuit, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. The Trump administration has promoted the new rules as commonsense measures to eliminate government freeloading and preserve benefits for those who need them most.

    The new Medicaid restrictions, which Democrats have criticized, were part of Trump’s big tax and policy law in 2025. The change affects those covered through an expansion in most states that gave more lower-income people access to the government’s safety net healthcare program.

    Starting Jan. 1, expansion enrollees age 19 to 64 will have to show that they work or do community service at least 80 hours a month or are in school at least half the time. There are exceptions for those considered medically frail or in addiction treatment programs, among others.

    This month’s announcement from CMS caught states off guard with a new definition of medical frailty. The law had said medically frail people include those who have substance use disorders, disabilities, or serious medical conditions. But the CMS rule went further, saying someone’s condition must “significantly impair” their ability to work, volunteer, or attend school at the rates required in the law for them to be granted an exemption.

    In 2027 and once in 2028, the patient can attest that they meet this definition. But when they try to renew coverage in 2028, they’ll need to prove it. Health analysts and state Medicaid directors have said they aren’t clear on what existing documentation could prove that point.

    In the lawsuit, states allege that this change came “contrary to months of regular communications with CMS and preliminary guidance materials upon which Plaintiff States based their implementation plans.” They say CMS has still not provided states with enough clarity on how they can update their systems appropriately.

    Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro joined the suit, continuing a trend since last year of committing Pennsylvania to these cases that the state’s Republican attorney general has sat out.

    “Donald Trump, Dr. Oz, and RFK Jr. are hellbent on trying to push aside people who rely on Medicaid to get the care they need,” Shapiro said on X. “But here in Pennsylvania, we’re going to keep standing up to protect our most vulnerable Pennsylvanians.”

    New York Attorney General Letitia James, one of the Democrats suing the administration, said the new rule puts thousands of her state’s residents at risk.

    “New Yorkers who are battling cancer, living with a disability, managing a serious mental health condition, or recovering from addiction should be able to get the healthcare they need without being buried in paperwork,” she said in a statement.

  • D.C. reaches court settlement with man detained while protesting troops’ patrol with Darth Vader song

    WASHINGTON — The District of Columbia has reached a settlement agreement for an undisclosed amount of money with a resident who claims police illegally detained him for following an Ohio National Guard patrol while playing Darth Vader’s theme song from “Star Wars” on his phone — an act of protest against the Trump administration’s federal law-enforcement surge in the nation’s capital.

    A court filing late Thursday says the plaintiff, Sam O’Hara, will drop his lawsuit’s claims against the district and four Metropolitan Police Department officers within three business days of receiving the settlement payment. The filing doesn’t specify a dollar amount for the deal between the district and O’Hara, who is represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia.

    In an email on Friday, an ACLU spokesperson referred to the settlement’s financial terms as “a significant amount” that O’Hara ”is pleased with” but said they aren’t disclosing the dollar figure to protect his privacy. A spokesperson for D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb’s office declined to comment on the settlement.

    O’Hara’s agreement with the district doesn’t resolve his related claims against an Ohio National Guard member. Attorneys for the Guard member, Sgt. Devon Beck, has asked a judge to dismiss O’Hara’s claims against him.

    “He was there because that was his assigned duty,” Beck’s lawyers wrote. “This was not an accidental encounter or a one-time disagreement on a public sidewalk.”

    An earlier court filing, in February, said O’Hara had reached a settlement agreement “in principle” with the district. In response, a judge agreed to suspend the case while they negotiated terms.

    “The government’s efforts to silence me ultimately backfired and brought more attention to the unjust deployment of the National Guard in Washington, D.C.,” O’Hara said in a statement. “This settlement serves as a reminder that constitutional freedoms are worth defending, especially when those in power would prefer we stay quiet.”

    O’Hara sued the district last October, claiming police officers violated his First Amendment rights to free speech and his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable seizures and excessive force.

    The ominous orchestral music of “The Imperial March” from the Star Wars movies was the soundtrack for O’Hara’s peaceful protests against President Donald Trump’s ongoing deployment of Guard members in Washington. Millions of TikTok users have viewed O’Hara’s videos of his interactions with troops, according to his lawsuit.

    O’Hara, an artist who works in the hospitality industry, says he didn’t interfere with the Guard troops during their Sept. 11, 2025, encounter on a public street. One of the troops summoned Metropolitan Police Department officers, who stopped O’Hara and kept him handcuffed for 15 to 20 minutes before releasing him without charges, according to the lawsuit.

    “The law might have tolerated government conduct of this sort a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. But in the here and now, the First Amendment bars government officials from shutting down peaceful protests,” the suit says.

    Trump, a Republican, issued an executive order declaring a crime emergency in Washington last August. Within weeks, hundreds of Guard troops and federal agents were helping police patrol the city. The surge inflamed tensions with residents of the heavily Democratic district. Hundreds of Guard members remain deployed in the district nearly a year later, with no clear end in sight.

  • House Republicans are looking to get their agenda on track after a chaotic week

    WASHINGTON — With a social media assist from President Donald Trump, House Speaker Mike Johnson is looking this week to ease the divisions in his Republican ranks and make progress on key legislative priorities before this fall’s elections.

    Johnson sent lawmakers home early last week after tumult in his conference prevented the House from voting on two spending bills and a measure dealing with veterans’ benefits. Meanwhile, the list of legislative priorities only grew with Trump requesting $87.6 billion in new spending, mostly to cover the cost of the war with Iran.

    The week ahead could signal whether Johnson can turn a short summer in Washington into a productive work period that voters will reward in November.

    “We have got a lot more to do. We have got to keep it going,” Johnson told Fox News Channel’s Sunday Morning Futures.

    Johnson, of Louisiana, went to the White House moments after the House wrapped up its abbreviated workweek and returned with a coveted Trump social media post telling Republicans to quit voting down the procedural rules that allow for final votes on their legislative priorities.

    “No more grandstanding, please!” Trump wrote.

    Before Trump’s message, Republican and Democratic lawmakers were openly doubting whether the House would even return this week or just follow the Senate’s lead and break for the July Fourth holiday.

    “I got to have everybody working here on all cylinders, and I’m excited to bring them back,” Johnson said on Fox.

    A promising week quickly turns sour for Republicans

    The House began last week with a legislative victory that speaks to voters’ concerns about affordability, passing bipartisan legislation aimed at lowering the cost of housing. It was the culmination of years of work by members on both sides of the political aisle.

    But Trump abruptly called off the bill signing ceremony, saying he would not act until Congress passed legislation that requires proof of citizenship for those registering to vote. Johnson said he would send the housing bill to Trump on Monday and hopes the Republican president signs it with the “biggest, boldest marker that he has.”

    Hard-liners in the House have also taken up Trump’s demand for the elections bill. More than two dozen of them have signed a letter pledging to vote against any Senate bills unless the elections legislation is attached. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R., Fla.) led the blockade that prompted Johnson to send lawmakers home early.

    Democrats seized on the Republican gridlock.

    ”This is the incredibly pathetic Congress,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D., Mass.). “The fact they can’t get their act together, can’t establish discipline to keep this place running, is stunning. I’ve never seen such incompetence.”

    Republicans also voiced their frustration.

    “I just think it’s a very self-defeating position for anyone to take, that they’re going to shut everything down over one issue,” said Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R., Pa.).

    But Rep. Andy Harris (R., Md.) predicted there will be more gridlock ahead unless a bill that includes the elections legislation is sent to Trump. While the House has already passed a version of the measure, it has stalled in the Senate.

    “Yeah, I think everything is going to be held up until we come to an agreement on voter ID and especially confirming the citizenship of Americans before they register to vote,” Harris said.

    Asked if Americans want Congress to be advancing other priorities besides the voting bill, known as the SAVE America Act, Harris replied. “I think they truly believe that this is a very important bill. I’m not sure they believe that a lot of the other things we’re doing here in Washington are very important.”

    The test ahead is on an important defense bill

    Trump’s admonition to House Republicans to quit voting down their own procedural rules will be put to the test this week. Leadership is expected to tee up a vote on an annual defense policy bill, must-pass legislation that calls for some of the increased spending that Trump wants for the Pentagon.

    Luna, a Trump ally, was making no promises about standing down, even after the president’s social media post. She has proposed attaching the elections legislation to the defense bill. Because of the narrow Republican majority, it takes only a few Republican “no” votes to block a bill from advancing to a final vote.

    “If they want my vote, they should entertain it, debate it, and if they block it, then we’ll see. But that’s how you get my vote,” Luna told reporters.

    There’s little time left for top GOP priorities

    The House is scheduled to be in session for only about 28 days before the midterm elections. The lawmakers are out for virtually all of August and October, giving them additional time to campaign back home for reelection.

    In that window, they must pass bills to keep the government running beyond the Sept. 30 end of the budget year. They also aspire to pass a bill on a party-line basis that would include more defense spending, partially paid for by cuts in other programs. Republicans have billed their effort as going after waste and fraud.

    It would be the successor to the big tax and spending cut bill that Republicans passed last year. That measure extended the tax cuts passed in Trump’s first term and expanded tax breaks for those who get income through tips and overtime. The bill also focused on boosting immigration enforcement, paid in part through reduced spending on Medicaid and nutrition assistance.

    Johnson has talked optimistically about being able to pass such a bill before the August recess. He met with members of the House Budget Committee last week as they try to find a path forward. But Republican senators are not counting on it. There are also doubters in the House, given the difficulty of the process that is required to bypass a filibuster in the Senate.

    “I’m just not seeing a path forward on it,” said Republican Rep. David Valadao, who represents a perennial swing district in California’s farm belt.

    But Budget Committee Chairperson Jodey Arrington (R., Texas) said members are close to a framework. He predicted it will be politically rewarded if they are able to address election integrity and curb waste and fraud.

    “We have to energize our base, and we have to address the enthusiasm gap,” Arrington said.

  • Supreme Court rules constitutional privacy protections apply to cellphone users location history

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court held Monday that constitutional privacy protections extend to cell phone location information, ruling in the case of a bank robber whose identity was discovered through a geofence warrant.

    Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the 6-3 court that people don’t forfeit expectations of privacy even when they opt into Google’s location history.

    “A cellphone user is not to be viewed as sharing private information with third parties — which then can be freely passed on to the government — just by doing the ordinary things cellphone users do,” Kagan wrote.

    Justice Samuel Alito wrote in dissent that Okello Chatrie had no expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turned over to Google.

    The decision is the court’s latest effort to apply a constitutional provision ratified in 1791 to technology the nation’s founders could not have envisioned.

    Police obtained a geofence warrant after a bank robbery in a suburb of Richmond, Va., and used it to locate cell phones that were near the bank around the time it was robbed in May 2019.

    One of those phones belonged to Chatrie, who had eluded the police until they turned to the powerful technological tool.

    The warrant kick-started the investigation. After determining that Chatrie was among those near the Call Federal Credit Union in Midlothian at the time, police obtained a search warrant for his home. They found nearly $100,000 in cash, including bills wrapped in bands signed by the bank teller.

    Chatrie pleaded guilty to robbing the bank and was sentenced to nearly 12 years in prison. His lawyers argued on appeal that none of the evidence should have been used against him.

    They challenged the warrant as a violation of his privacy because it allowed authorities to gather the location history of people near the bank without having any evidence they had anything to do with the robbery. Prosecutors argued that Chatrie had no expectation of privacy because he voluntarily opted into Google’s location history.

    The Supreme Court did not decide Monday whether the search complied with the Fourth Amendment, which bans unreasonable searches and seizures. It sent the case back to a lower court for more work.

    A federal judge had ruled that the search violated Chatrie’s rights, but allowed the evidence to be used because the officer who applied for the warrant reasonably believed he was acting properly.

    The federal appeals court in Richmond upheld the conviction in a fractured ruling. In a separate case, the federal appeals court in New Orleans ruled that geofence warrants “are general warrants categorically prohibited by the Fourth Amendment.”

  • Supreme Court rejects Trump’s push to toss $5 million verdict in E. Jean Carroll sexual abuse case

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a push by President Donald Trump to throw out a jury’s $5 million finding that he sexually abused the writer E. Jean Carroll at a New York City department store in the mid-1990s and later defamed her.

    The high court declined to take up the case in a brief, unexplained order, as is typical. There were no noted dissents. Trump also plans to appeal another $83.3 million verdict awarded to Carroll by a different jury after a second defamation trial, his lawyers have said.

    The decision comes as the court hands down its biggest opinions, including a ruling that expands Trump’s firing power over the federal bureaucracy with the exception of the Federal Reserve.

    Trump called the decision to pass on the Carroll case “surprising” in a social media post, and he said he would continue to fight the defamation claims. “This Case is really against the United States of America, and all it stands for,” he wrote.

    Trump’s lawyers had argued that allegations leading to the verdict were propped up by “highly inflammatory” evidentiary rulings, including those that allowed the testimony of two other women who accused Trump of sexual abuse decades ago. Trump has denied all three women’s allegations.

    Trump’s attorneys argued the judge broke federal evidence rules in the case. They framed it as a distraction from Trump’s unique duties as president, though the verdict came before his return to the White House.

    “This mistreatment of a President cannot be allowed to stand,” Attorney Justin D. Smith wrote in court documents. Trump, a Republican, has since nominated Smith to be an appeals court judge. His lawyers called the case “Liberal Lawfare” in a statement on Monday.

    Carroll’s lawyers had urged the justices to pass on the case. They argued that the women’s testimony was relevant because the allegations were similar and that Judge Lewis Kaplan’s decisions were in line with others around the country. “This question is not worthy of review,” wrote attorney Roberta Kaplan, who is not related to the judge.

    Monday’s decision affirms the jury’s verdict will stand, she said in a statement Monday. “His multiple efforts to appeal that verdict have all failed and today’s ruling ends his quest to avoid accountability for his actions,” she said.

    Carroll, a longtime advice columnist and former TV talk show host, testified at a 2023 trial that Trump turned a friendly encounter in spring 1996 into a violent attack in the dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman, a luxury retailer across the street from Trump Tower in Manhattan. The jury also found Trump liable for defaming Carroll when he denied her allegation in 2022.

    The Associated Press does not identify people who say they have been sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly, as Carroll has done.

    Trump has successfully fended off other hefty court judgments, including a New York civil fraud penalty of over $500 million thrown out by a New York appeals court. The Supreme Court also granted him broad immunity from criminal prosecution in 2024, though it later narrowly rejected his bid to halt sentencing in his New York hush money case.

  • America 250 celebrations bring extraordinary security challenge to Washington

    WASHINGTON — Federal law enforcement authorities in Washington, D.C., are preparing for one of their largest and most complex security operations as the nation’s capital gears up to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the nation’s freedom.

    With rising political violence, including recent incidents near the White House, and a president who enjoys being at the center of public pomp yet has repeatedly faced attempts on his life, a major security challenge awaits.

    “It comes as no surprise to you that D.C. on a normal day is a target-rich environment,” said Darren B. Cox assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office at a recent news conference detailing the security preparations. “We are prepared for any threats.”

    Hundreds of thousands of people are expected to visit Washington in the coming weeks for the festivities.

    The throngs will be joined by thousands of law enforcement officers and agents and 5,000 National Guard troops, along with military-style vehicles and other hardware they don’t often see on the streets of America.

    Authorities are preparing for a major security operation

    The largest crowds are expected July 4, with multiple events happening simultaneously, including the Great American State Fair, a showcase for each state and a signature attraction of the celebrations that stretches across the National Mall.

    The annual fireworks display that night is designated a National Security Special Event for the first time by the Department of Homeland Security, granting it the highest classification for federal security coordination.

    For visitors, that means strict ID requirements, long lines, and magnetometers, similar to air travel security. Snipers are also expected to be deployed at some events.

    Flights at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, which is across the Potomac River from Washington, will be suspended longer than in other years because of the scope of the celebrations — from noon on July 4 until the next day. Other America 250 events that include flyovers or parachute jumps could prompt more flight disruptions.

    The FBI, Secret Service, U.S. Capitol Police, U.S. Park Police, and D.C. National Guard have all been involved in security coordination for the events. At the news conference earlier this month, equipment that could be deployed to guard the city was on display, including BearCat armored SWAT vehicles, Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected, known as MRAPs, as well as communication vans and FBI diving boats.

    “Our protective model is meant to adjust to any type of direct or indirect threats that we come across,” said Tara McLeese, special agent in charge of the Secret Service Washington Field Office. “I can assure you that we have no lack of imagination as to the potential threats out there.”

    Brig. Gen. Leland Blanchard II, interim commander of the D.C. National Guard, said the planning had been underway for months and included rehearsals.

    Blanchard said the guard members would continue the roles they have served the last 10 months as part of a deployment to the city President Donald Trump says is meant to fight crime. Blanchard highlighted that guard members, including military police officers, would be helping with duties like traffic and crowd control as well as responding to emergencies around the events.

    Trump, who has already attended several events leading up to July 4, including the kickoff rally last week launching the Great American State Fair, has said on Truth Social that he would hold a rally on the National Mall.

    Speaking at a news conference Monday updating the upcoming security preparations, Cox reiterated that “at this time we are not tracking any credible threats related to the July 4th event, but we always remain vigilant.”

    Recent violence has shaped the threat picture

    The festivities come at a fraught moment, with recent political violence creating a complex threat environment for authorities. One man, Cole Tomas Allen, has been charged with attempting to assassinate the president after he sprinted past security at the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner in April. Allen has pleaded not guilty.

    In the following weeks, two men on two separate occasions opened fired at Secret Service officers, the service said. Each incident happened in the vicinity of the White House.

    More recently, the FBI announced it had thwarted a planned attack targeting Trump’s UFC cage-fighting show at the White House. Several suspects have been arrested in that case.

    Security was already enhanced on the National Mall ahead of the launch of festivities, as Trump claimed without providing evidence that vandals had damaged the Reflecting Pool that he had recently renovated.

    Matt Dallek, a political scientist at George Washington University who studies extremism, said Trump posed a unique security challenge because he is “both an accelerant and a target of political violence.”

    The nation’s bicentennial offers a historical parallel

    Observers draw some parallels to the 1976 bicentennial. The nation was coming off Watergate and Vietnam, and 10 months before the celebration there were two assassination attempts against then-President Gerald Ford.

    “There was a lot of sourness in the country in ’76, a lot of cynicism about the direction of the country,” Dallek said. But both Ford and his democratic opponent Jimmy Carter understood the threat political divisions posed and “were looking to bring down the level of vitriol.”

    Angelyn Spaulding Flowers, professor of homeland security and administration of justice at the University of the District of Columbia, said the amount of security was unparalleled for the city, citing the ongoing and open-ended National Guard presence that has flooded Washington with additional security patrols for months.