A United States judge has issued a permanent injunction preventing the administration of President Donald Trump from using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 (AEA) to deport Venezuelans from South Texas.

Thursday’s ruling is the first of its kind — and is likely to be swiftly appealed.

It follows similar, if temporary, orders barring the government’s use of the law, as Trump seeks the rapid removal of undocumented immigrants from the country.

In his 36-page decision, US District Court Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr ruled that the Trump administration had “exceeded the statutory boundaries” of the Alien Enemies Act, a wartime law.

Trump had issued an executive proclamation on March 15 to invoke the law against members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. He argued that Tren de Aragua was “perpetrating an invasion of and predatory incursion into the United States”, thereby justifying such extreme measures.

The Alien Enemies Act, after all, had been invoked only three times before, most recently during World War II.

But Judge Rodriguez said the threat of Tren de Aragua fell far short of the standards necessary to use the Alien Enemies Act, though he did concede the gang participated in activity that “unambiguously is harmful to society”.

“The Court concludes that [Tren de Aragua’s activities] do not fall within the plain, ordinary meaning of ‘invasion’ or ‘predatory incursion’ for purposes of the AEA,” the judge wrote.

“The Court concludes that the President’s invocation of the AEA through the Proclamation exceeds the scope of the statute and, as a result, is unlawful.”

Since the Trump administration did “not possess the lawful authority under the AEA”, Judge Rodriguez ruled it could not use the law to “detain Venezuelan aliens, transfer them within the United States, or remove them from the country”.

Judge Rodriguez is a Trump-appointed judge who assumed his current post under the Republican leader’s first term in 2018. His decision applies to the Southern District of Texas, including cities like Houston.

But while it is the most sweeping ruling of its kind, it joins an array of legal cases and court decisions weighing the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act.

The law allows the US government to detain and deport citizens of an enemy country in times of war or invasion. Its usage, however, has been highly controversial, with critics calling it unconstitutional.

The Alien Enemies Act was used as justification, for example, to incarcerate tens of thousands of Japanese Americans and other foreign nationals in camps during World War II. That incident resulted in the US formally apologising and offering compensation to Japanese American survivors decades later.

Trump is believed to be the first president to invoke the Alien Enemies Act outside of wartime. Using nativist rhetoric, he has sought to frame undocumented migration to the US as an unbridled “invasion” of criminals, threatening US communities with violence.

Since taking office for a second term, Trump has designated criminal groups like Tren de Aragua as foreign terrorist organisations, a category that makes non-citizen members inadmissible to the US.

But the Supreme Court has ruled (PDF) that, for removals made under the Alien Enemies Act, foreign nationals are entitled to a judicial review of their cases.

Lower courts have also questioned whether the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act violated that right to due process.

Judges in Colorado, Manhattan and Pennsylvania have issued temporary injunctions against the law’s use, and in Washington, DC, Judge James Boasberg has overseen a high-profile case where three planes of deportees were sent to prison in El Salvador under the law, despite an injunction against its use.

Last month, Boasberg ruled there was “probable cause” to find the Trump administration in contempt of court for violating his order. Hearings in that case are continuing, but Trump and his allies have argued that Boasberg has overstepped his judicial authority by interfering in matters of foreign policy.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has been among the plaintiffs fighting the Alien Enemies Act’s use in court, and on Thursday, it applauded Judge Rodriguez’s decision.

“The court ruled the president can’t unilaterally declare an invasion of the United States and invoke a wartime authority during peacetime,” ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt said in a statement. “Congress never meant for this 18th-century wartime law to be used this way.”

Adriana Pinon, the legal director of the ACLU’s Texas branch, also framed the decision as a win for immigrant rights.

“This permanent injunction is a significant win for preventing unlawful, unilateral executive action that has been stoking fear across Texas, especially within border communities,” she said.

“Immigrants are, and always have been, an integral part of this state and nation. They, too, are protected by US laws and the Constitution.”

The Trump administration is expected to appeal the decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, a conservative-leaning court.

Did Bill Belichick, a 73-year-old intransigent, forever controlling-the-narrative football coach with a record six Super Bowl titles, seemingly cede the reins to his girlfriend, 24-year-old former cheerleader Jordon Hudson?

So many questions and so many attempted answers. Let’s survey the relationship that has dominated the headlines this week.

Who is this couple and why do people care about them?

Hudson was born in Hancock, Maine, a speck on the map of 2,500 people best known as the home of Wild Ray’s “Chainsaw Sawyer Artist Live Show.” She has said on social media that she hails from several generations of fishermen.

A former Bridgewater State University and East Celebrity Elite squad cheerleader, Hudson competed for Miss Maine USA the last two years and explained why on social media.

“As the daughter of displaced fishermen, I care to use my voice to protect the fleeting tradition and heritage of Maine fishing families, to prevent others from going through the same plight as what mine had to go through,” Hudson wrote on Instagram, where she has nearly 100,000 followers.

After graduating, Hudson was employed for a year as social media ambassador for the clothing company Rebel Athletic. She said she met Belichick in 2021 and they began dating two years later.

Belichick was an NFL head coach for 29 years, including 24 with the New England Patriots, whom he led to nine Super Bowls, winning six. Widely acknowledged as the greatest coach in NFL history, Belichick will begin his first season as a college head coach this fall at the University of North Carolina. He signed a five-year, $50-million deal and hired his two sons, Steve and Brian, as assistant coaches.

CBS’ ‘How did you guys meet’ question

Belichick consented to an interview with “CBS Sunday Morning,” ostensibly to promote his book, “The Art of Winning: Lessons From My Life in Football,” scheduled to be released Tuesday. About six minutes into the eight-minute segment, interviewer Tony Dokoupil mentions Hudson in a voiceover, saying: “Jordon was a constant presence during our interview.”

The interview proceeds with a shot showing Hudson seated at a desk in front of a monitor a few feet from Belichick and Dokoupil.

“You have Jordon right over there, everybody in the world seems to be following this relationship,” Dokoupil said, with the camera locked on Hudson seated off the set. “How did you guys meet?”

“We’re not talking about this,” Hudson loudly blurts out before Belichick can respond. It was one of several instances where Hudson interrupted the interview.

Why the uproar with Hudson interrupting the interview?

The incident was unexpected — shocking, even — because for at least two decades, Belichick was the master of stonewalling reporters, steering interviews and giving snarky responses to questions he didn’t appreciate.

Does he suddenly require someone to come to his rescue or did that particular question touch a nerve with Hudson?

The Athletic pointed out that Belichick had his defiant chops intact earlier in the interview when Dokoupil asked him why Patriots owner Robert Kraft wasn’t mentioned in the book. The relationship between the men was strained for years and Kraft asserted that he fired Belichick in early 2024.

Dokoupil: “I have to ask about Robert Kraft … 24 years together, six Super Bowls. Unless I’m wrong, he’s not in this book. How come?”

Belichick: “He’s not. Well, again, it’s about my life lessons in football, and it’s really more about the ones I experienced directly.”

Dokoupil: “He’s not even in the acknowledgment section.”

Belichick, after a pause: “Correct.”

Dokoupil: “Do you feel like you were treated with dignity and respect when you were let go by Robert Kraft?”

Belichick: “Yeah, well, it was a mutual decision for us to part ways.”

Dokoupil: “He said ‘fired.’”

Belichick: “It was a mutual decision.”

Why did Belichick issue a statement after the CBS interview?

Belichick issued an internal email after the CBS interview and ensuing uproar, saying he expected the focus to be on the book and that “unrelated topics” took him by surprise. Hudson shared the email on Instagram, accompanied by the Taylor Swift song “Look What You Made Me Do.”

“I don’t think this is fantastic, but it probably will hype the book, which is clearly the ongoing theme here,” Belichick’s email starts. “This is about what I expected from the media.

“We went through how important it was for me to put ‘I f— up’ in the book, and of course, that is the feature of this article — which is mostly about admitting mistakes and talking about a Super Bowl mistake. I am fine with putting mistakes in the book, but I am certainly not surprised that of 260+ pages, that is what they would highlight.

“I have, at times reluctantly, gone along with the title, cover, and language in the book. I am not going to be the conductor of a hype train in the book promotion — we have enough hype to work with. I hope we can get on the same page in promoting the book authentically.”

Belichick later Wednesday released a statement through North Carolina, saying the CBS interview was “selectively edited” and suggested a “false narrative.” He also said that he “clearly communicated” with his publicist at Simon & Schuster that promotional interviews would focus only on the book’s contents.

“Unfortunately, that expectation was not honored during the interview,” Belichick said in the statement.

CBS later released a statement saying that the agreement was for a “wide-ranging interview.”

“There were no preconditions or limitations to this conversation,” the statement read. “This was confirmed repeatedly with his publisher before the interview took place and after it was completed.”

How did Hudson and Belichick meet?

Hudson and Belichick were seated next to one another on a flight from Massachusetts to Florida in February 2021. Their meeting was documented through photographs of them and of his autograph on the then-21-year-old’s “Deductive Logic” college textbook.

They were seen together in public beginning in 2023 and attended former quarterback Tom Brady’s Patriots Hall of Fame induction ceremony in June. A month earlier, Brady and former Patriots tight end Rob Gronkowski zeroed in on Belichick during “The Roast of Tom Brady” on Netflix in May 2024 with good-natured teasing for his and Hudson’s nearly 49-year age difference.

Said Gronkowski: “Coach, you used to talk about Foxborough High School when we sucked. But now I know why you were so obsessed with Foxborough High School: You were scouting your new girlfriend.”

Added Brady: “When somebody asked me which [championship] ring was my favorite, I used to say, ‘The next one.’ Now that I’m retired, my favorite is that Ring camera that caught Coach Belichick slinking out of that poor girl’s house at 6 a.m. a few months ago.”

Snoop Dogg worked in his own shot during his opening monologue at the NFL Honors awards show in February, with Belichick and Hudson in the audience. The rapper was joking about how long he’s been a football fan, saying, “I remember, what was it — Bill Belichick’s girlfriend wasn’t even born yet.”

How involved is Hudson in Belichick’s professional life?

The Athletic obtained emails through an open records request that document Belichick requesting that Hudson be copied on certain correspondence at North Carolina. The 44 pages of emails address his concerns about social media attacks and the optics of hiring his son, Steve, as defensive coordinator. Hudson is not an employee of the university, according to the public records request.

“It is really worth emphasizing the point that Steve has the experience of being a COLLEGE defensive coordinator and will bring a plethora of knowledge to the coaching staff,” Hudson wrote of the former defensive coordinator at the University of Washington.

Hudson’s involvement included a request that staff scrub negative comments about Belichick on the football page of the university website.

“Is there anyone monitoring the UNC Football page for slanderous commentary and subsequently deleting it / blocking users that are harassing BB in the comments?” Hudson asked Feb. 13.

Former Patriots players Julian Edelman and Gronkowski defended Hudson on their “Dudes on Dudes” podcast Wednesday, saying she was “working with Coach Belichick in the professional world” as his publicist. Comedian Nikki Glaser supported that stance in a comment shared to Instagram, writing, “100% this. She’s acting as his publicist. Publicists do this during interviews. People are out for blood.”

Jennifer Schmitt, however, responded by shading her father-in-law’s girlfriend: “Publicists act in a professional manner and don’t ‘storm’ off set delaying an interview,” wrote Schmitt, who’s married to Steve Belichick.

The Athletic also reported that Hudson “played an instrumental role” in stopping the production of a “Hard Knocks” docuseries on the North Carolina program this fall only a few days after an agreement had been reached. In a December 2024 email to North Carolina officials, Hudson identified herself as the chief operating officer of Belichick Productions, although the Athletic could not find evidence of the company’s existence.

NFL Films was scheduled to begin filming March 1, but two days later, the NFL sent an email to North Carolina’s counsel confirming that showmakers “will not proceed with the production of the Belichick project.”

Was Hudson prepared to defend Belichick?

Hudson seemed to brace herself in December for something like this current kerfuffle, writing on her Instagram Stories: “Nothing changed for us in 2024 except for ‘public knowledge’: yet, somehow everything changed. Going strong. I can’t wait to take punches for you in 2025. Keep swinging, Keyboard Warriors. Your illusion of righteousness only fuels my authenticity.”

A different view was articulated by Athletic columnist Steve Buckley, who wrote Wednesday:

“If the plan here was to portray Belichick as cool, what with his social media-savvy girlfriend fending off the old-school, on-set question asker, then the plan failed. Belichick instead came across as somebody who needed saving. And it’s hard watching this interview while defending Belichick as the ever-vigilant micromanager who misses nothing.

“Will this interview inspire the biggest and best recruits to take their talents to Chapel Hill? Doubt it. Will it help get Belichick back on the radar for a head coaching job in the NFL? That’s looking less likely.

“There used to be a Bill Belichick ‘brand.’ Grumpy. Rumpled. Genius. Now there’s a Bill Belichick-Jordon Hudson brand. We’re on to ‘awkward.’”

SEATTLE — Inside a Virginia courthouse, three immigration agents in plainclothes — one masked — detained a man who had just had misdemeanor assault charges dismissed. They declined to show identification or a warrant to the man, and one threatened to prosecute horrified witnesses who tried to intervene, cellphone video shows.

In North Carolina, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement confirmed it arrested four people at a county courthouse, according to local media reports, prompting the sheriff to express concerns about a lack of communication from the agency as well as about disruption to court proceedings.

Inside a courthouse in New Hampshire, a pair of agents tackled a Venezuelan man outside an elevator, flattening an older man with a cane in the process. And in Boston, an ICE agent detained a man who was on trial. A municipal court judge held the agent in contempt over the arrest, but the order was later overturned by a federal judge.

The flurry of immigration enforcement at courthouses around the country in the last month — already heavily criticized by judicial officials and lawyers — has renewed a legal battle from President Trump’s first term as advocates fear people might avoid coming to court.

It’s drawing further attention with last Friday’s arrest of Judge Hannah Dugan in Wisconsin. The FBI arrested Dugan on suspicion that she tried to help a defendant evade waiting federal agents by letting him leave her courtroom through a jury door.

“Some of these judges think they are beyond and above the law and they are not, and we’re sending a very strong message today,” Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said during an appearance on Fox News after the arrest.

History of ICE’s arrest practices

Lena Graber, senior staff attorney with the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, told the Associated Press that she’s aware of at least a dozen recent immigration arrests at courthouses around the country.

“The historical context is really important,” Graber said. “This is something that was not part of ICE’s practice until the first Trump administration, and people were shocked.”

ICE long had a general practice of not arresting people at certain locations, including schools, hospitals, courthouses and churches. But during the first Trump administration, the agency adopted a policy explicitly allowing courthouse arrests of “specific, targeted aliens,” arguing that it was especially important in “sanctuary” jurisdictions where officials do not notify the agency before releasing immigrants facing deportation cases.

Courthouse immigration arrests jumped, drawing condemnation from judicial officials and legal organizations, as well as lawsuits from some states and the adoption of bills seeking to block the practice.

Dugan’s case is similar to one brought during the first Trump administration against a Massachusetts judge who was accused of helping a man sneak out a back door of a courthouse to evade a waiting immigration officer. A judge in Oregon faced similar allegations — though not an arrest or criminal charges — in 2017.

The chief justices of some states, including California and Washington, asked ICE to stop, saying fear of arrest would keep crime victims and witnesses from showing up in court. In one well-publicized case, agents in Texas arrested a woman while she was obtaining a protection order against an alleged abuser.

The Biden administration imposed restrictions on courthouse immigration arrests, but they were quickly undone when Trump returned to office this year.

Under guidance issued Jan. 21, ICE officials are allowed to carry out immigration enforcement in or near courthouses if they believe someone they’re trying to find will be there. Whenever possible, the agents are supposed to make arrests in nonpublic areas, to coordinate with courthouse security and to avoid disrupting court operations.

Virginia prosecutor promises to investigate court arrest

Teodoro Dominguez Rodriguez, identified by ICE as a Honduran national, was confronted and arrested by immigration enforcement officers after he left a Charlottesville, Va., courtroom April 22. It was the second immigration arrest at the court that day.

The first wasn’t recorded, but as word spread, Nick Reppucci, who heads the public defender’s office there, scrambled staff to the courthouse. They captured Dominguez Rodriguez’s arrest on camera.

The three agents, one in a balaclava-style ski mask, ignored demands from observers to show badges or a warrant, the video shows. One agent threatened to have the U.S. attorney’s office prosecute two women who tried to place themselves between the agents and Dominguez Rodriguez.

Sheriff Chan Bryant confirmed that the agents had shown badges and paperwork to a bailiff beforehand. But Albemarle County Commonwealth’s Atty. Jim Hingeley criticized the officers for failing to identify themselves while making the arrest.

“Bystanders, or the person being arrested, might have violently resisted what on its face appeared to be an unlawful assault and abduction,” Hingeley said in an emailed statement.

Reppucci decried the “normalization happening here, where federal law enforcement are at this point grabbing people without being required to show that person any form of identification.”

In a written statement, ICE stood behind the actions of the officers, “who are trained to assess and prosecute apprehensions in a manner that best ensures operational success and public safety.”

The Associated Press was unable to locate relatives who might speak on Dominguez Rodriguez’s behalf, and it was not clear if he had an attorney representing him.

Reppucci stressed the effect arrests like Dominguez Rodriguez’s could have on people coming to court, a place he said is supposed to be where “disputes are resolved in an orderly, peaceful manner.”

“People in divorce proceedings, people with civil disputes, custody hearings, potential witnesses, all are going to be less likely to come to court,” he said.

Johnson and Hollingsworth write for the Associated Press. Hollingsworth reported from Mission, Kan. Claire Rush in Portland, Ore., and Rebecca Santana in Washington contributed to this report.

The celebration was simple. But the relief was immense.

In the bottom of the second inning Wednesday afternoon, on the last day of what had been a torturous opening month to the season,Max Muncy finally did the thing that had eluded him over an ice-cold start.

After 29 forgettable games and 90 infuriating at-bats, the 10th-year veteran finally hit his first home run.

With a lightning-quick swing on a down-and-away, 92-mph sinker from Miami Marlins right-hander Cal Quantrill, Muncy put a long-awaited end to his longest home run drought — and some much-needed life into his slumping start.

His 433-foot solo blast landed high up in the deepest part of the right field pavilion. It sent his Dodgers teammates in the dugout into a frenzy.

And though Muncy did little more than pound a closed fist into his open palm as he trotted around the bases for the first time, it allowed him to finally release the emotional tensions that had been building on the inside.

“Felt really good to have that happen,” Muncy told reporters from his clubhouse locker afterward, finally allowing himself to smile after a season-best game in which he also tripled and drew a walk.

“Just hope today is something to build on,” he added. “It’s been a rough month.”

For much of March and April, there was much amiss in Muncy’s play.

The slugger was batting just .180 entering Wednesday, a troubling mark even for a traditionally low-average hitter. He had struck out 34 times and walked only 14, a master of the free pass going at one point eight straight games without drawing one.

Muncy’s defense, quietly an area of improvement for the 34-year-old last season, also cratered. He has committed four errors at third base, all on errant throws. His advanced analytics have tanked, going from an above-league-average mark in Statcast’s “outs above average” metric last year to the third-lowest grade of any qualified third baseman.

Amid the mounting frustration he even became the subject of a viral social media video during the trip to Chicago last week, captured glaring at a fan who was shouting profanities about him and his family as he boarded the team’s bus outside Wrigley Field following a loss to the Cubs.

“Playing in L.A. is not easy,” Muncy said. “It’s a privilege, and it’s a privilege to play under this pressure. It’s something I’ve always thrived on. But it doesn’t mean it’s been easy, for me or my family.”

The Dodgers’ Max Muncy reacts as he runs the bases after hitting a home run Wednesday against the Marlins.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

Nothing about Muncy’s performance raised more red flags than his lack of home runs.

Ever since his successful emergence as a minor-league reclamation project seven years ago, power had been his trademark. Even in stretches when his batting average hovered around the Mendoza Line, or his strikeout total climbed leaderboards, his ability to slug had been the great equalizer.

Entering the year, Muncy’s 190 long balls with the Dodgers ranked top-10 in franchise history. His four seasons with at least 35 were topped only by Duke Snider.

And yet he failed to hit one in his first 28 games. Entering Wednesday he was in danger of going an entire month without a home run, something that never had happened since he joined the Dodgers.

“Pretty puzzling,” manager Dave Roberts said last week of Muncy’s power outage, which also contributed to a slugging percentage in the low .200s. “I know he’s trying to find his way out.”

At the root of Muncy’s woes was a swing he has been tinkering with since the offseason.

Last year the two-time All-Star had one of his most productive seasons. His .232 batting average was his best since 2021. His 141 OPS+ (an all-encompassing advanced offensive metric) trailed only his breakout 2018 performance for the highest of his career. In the National League Championship Series he set a postseason record by reaching base 12 consecutive times.

Despite that Muncy still went into the winter feeling like there was more to unlock. One of the big changes he made was in the type of contact he was chasing. After hitting almost 75% of his balls in the air last season, he felt a lower angle of trajectory might improve the consistency of his production.

“I spent all offseason and spring trying to hit low liners and ground balls,” Muncy said earlier this year, “to try and be on top of the ball.”

The only problem: That mechanical adjustment came with unforeseen side effects.

During the season’s first couple of weeks, Muncy realized he was lurching forward on his swings in an effort to keep the ball down. It not only got him out of his prime hitting position, but also gave him a fraction-of-a-second less reaction time to read each pitch and make the right swing decision.

“The ball sped up on me the first few series of the season and I really wasn’t myself,” Muncy said. “I was chasing a lot of stuff and I was unable to recognize it. It was very uncharacteristic of me.”

So, more recently, Muncy has been recalibrating at the plate. He’s made an effort to stay back in his swing, closely dissecting video of his at-bats to make sure his mechanics remain in sync. He’s rediscovered his feel for the strike zone, recording almost as many walks (12) as strikeouts (13) since his eight-game stretch without a free pass. He reached base 10 times during the Dodgers’ five-game winning streak.

“It seems like he goes through stretches where he’s really scuffling, and he always finds a way to get out of it,” Roberts said.

“The swing feels like it’s getting closer and closer,” Muncy added. “I still have to clean some things up. Have to be better in certain situations. It’s a work in progress. But … it’s just getting the ball to go forward.”

On Wednesday it got the ball to go out of the yard too — helping Muncy finally flash some pop.

“We all know Max is going to be Max,” first baseman Freddie Freeman said. “For him to get that first one, hopefully the floodgates open for him.”

Freeman was one of several teammates who had an elated reaction to Muncy’s home run, pumping both fists above his head from the dugout. When Muncy finished rounding the bases, Mookie Betts wrapped him in a bear hug, while Teoscar Hernández showered him with a supersized serving of his sunflower seed celebration.

“He got me pretty good,” Muncy joked from his locker.

From a few stalls over, Hernández chimed in: “He deserved it!”

“When you feel the support from your teammates — that elation, that joy — it gets emotional,” Roberts added. “That just speaks to how much it’s been wearing on him. The struggles. And the lack of a homer.”

That latter concern, at least, has been alleviated. And though Muncy’s batting average is still a lowly .194 and his on-base-plus-slugging percentage is still an underwhelming .610, he noted he finally might have “something I can build on” entering May with renewed confidence at the plate.

“It was huge for me, almost a little emotional,” Muncy said. “But this clubhouse is very tight, very close. Everyone cares about each other in here. We all just want to win, and for us to win, everyone needs to be clicking. That’s something this whole clubhouse buys into. So just to get that kind of greeting felt amazing.”

Sudan is suffering the world’s worst famine in four decades, says the United Nations, as conflict between government and paramilitary forces rages.

Yet international aid is dwindling.

What’s next for the people of Sudan?

Presenter: Nick Clark

Guests:

Amgad Fareid Eltayeb – Executive director of Fikra for Studies and Development, a Sudanese research and policy organisation

Kholood Khair – Founding director of Confluence Advisory, a think tank formerly based in Khartoum

Justin Lynch – Managing director of Conflict Insights Group

Civil liberties have come under threat since United States President Donald Trump took power in January. The Trump administration has primarily targeted more vulnerable groups, such as immigrants, tourists and non-American activists, as US law does not grant them the same protections as US citizens.

Some immigrants and tourists have found themselves trapped at the border for long periods of time. In some cases, they have been held due to social media posts critical of Trump. That has raised the question – what should a person be prepared for when they’re going to encounter US immigration agents?

Points of entry

Crossing the US border is a point of particular vulnerability for targets of Trump’s crackdown.

US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) detained Lebanese physician and assistant professor at Brown University Rasha Alawieh, as she attempted to re-enter the United States in March, and eventually deported her after agents allegedly discovered images related to Hezbollah on her phone. The agency provided no evidence that she had any connection to the paramilitary group, and she tried to explain that she did not support them before she was eventually sent to Lebanon.

Tom Bowman, policy counsel at the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), says crossing the US border raises “distinct privacy concerns,” because Customs and Border Protection has more authority to search people than regular law enforcement. They are allowed to search people’s electronic devices “without a warrant or probable cause,” he says.

“If you are a citizen, they cannot deny you entry into the country on the basis of refusing to unlock your phone. They may confiscate the phone, but they can’t deny you entry,” says Bill Budington, a senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). “If you are at risk of deportation, then it might be advisable to comply with any requests by customers and border enforcement, but that doesn’t mean you can’t minimise the amount of data you’re carrying with you.”

“Some travellers choose to limit what data they carry across the border,” says Bowman. “That may involve using a travel-only device, storing essential information in the cloud and logging out of all accounts, or removing sensitive apps and files entirely. Others opt to shut down devices completely before arriving at the border, relying on full-disk encryption to protect their contents.”

The ICE has been targeting student protesters who support Palestine, and it often surveils social media to do so.

Badar Khan Suri, a postdoctoral fellow at Georgetown University, was seized by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in March as he returned to his home following a Ramadan iftar. ICE alleged Suri, who was born in India and was in the US on a student visa, was “spreading Hamas propaganda and promoting antisemitism on social media”, which his lawyers have denied.

Two days earlier, US Citizenship and Immigration Services had announced that it would screen the social media accounts of people applying for permanent residence and non-citizens affiliated with educational institutions for evidence of “antisemitic activity”.

Punishing protest

While the Trump administration has not yet invoked the Insurrection Act, it is punishing people for protesting – non-citizens, for now.

The administration has notably been trying to deport a student activist at Columbia University named Mahmoud Khalil because of his involvement in pro-Palestinian protests, and his is just one of several similar cases.

“I think people should be very concerned,” says Daniel Solove, a professor of intellectual property and technology law at George Washington University. “We’re living in a surveillance society, and the government can use facial recognition technologies and AI-assisted surveillance technologies to systematically identify and track protesters. We’re already seeing the government go after protesters.”

Cornell University student and activist Momodou Taal had his student visa revoked and recently decided to leave the US to avoid deportation. Yunseo Chung, a Columbia student and activist and a legal permanent resident who moved to the US from South Korea at age 7, has also been targeted by ICE.

Federal agents might use video surveillance, social media monitoring, facial recognition or geolocation data to identify who is participating in protests, Bowman says. He says people documenting protests with photos and videos can also unintentionally identify who participated in a particular demonstration, so people should be careful about how they’re using their devices.

“One basic protection is to turn your phone on airplane mode when you’re going to a protest. That will ensure that you’re not sending your data in real time,” says Budington. “You can still navigate streets with offline maps. Both Google Maps and Apple Maps have a way to do that.”

Protesters can also use messaging apps like Signal to communicate during protests, because then their messages can be encrypted. Some might recommend just leaving your phone at home, but you might want to have it in case of an emergency or if you want to document wrongful police actions.

It is essentially impossible to avoid all government snooping and keep one’s data completely secure 100 percent of the time, but there are actions people crossing the border or attending protests can take that will help reduce the risk of them being targeted by the government.

Americans are becoming more aware of their need for privacy, and they’re looking for ways to protect themselves. Buddington says people seem to be a lot more concerned about privacy than they were five or 10 years ago.

“The government already has massive troves of personal data and is using it improperly. The government already has countless surveillance technologies and is using them,” Solove says. “We’re already in a Constitutional crisis. It seems that this administration will push as far as they can until they are stopped.”

WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus says contributions have fallen sharply across the board.

The head of the World Health Organization (WHO) has warned that global health is at serious risk as donor support dries up and severe budget cuts loom.

WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on Thursday that the agency is facing “the greatest disruption to global health financing in memory” as contributions fall sharply across the board.

The crisis deepened after the United States, formerly the organisation’s biggest funder, pulled out in January, saying the health agency had mishandled the COVID-19 pandemic and other international health crises. The US had previously covered nearly a fifth of the WHO’s budget.

In response, the WHO has revised its financial plans, scaling back its current spending and proposing a 21 percent cut for the 2026-2027 budget cycle.

An internal memo seen by the news agency Reuters outlines a reduction from $5.3bn to $4.2bn as well as significant staff cuts.

“It is of course very painful,” Tedros said, warning that slashing the budget will directly impact healthcare systems around the world, particularly in the most vulnerable countries.

Across-the-board cuts

The WHO plans to make cuts across all levels of its operations, including its headquarters in Geneva and regional and country offices. Some offices in wealthier nations may be closed entirely.

Assistant Director General for Business Operations Raul Thomas said about 25 percent of the WHO’s salary budget remains unfunded over the next two years, adding that it’s too early to say how many roles will be lost because that would depend on staffing levels and locations.

While the US exit added pressure, Tedros pointed to deeper structural problems. The WHO currently relies on a handful of countries for 80 percent of its budget through voluntary contributions. He said the agency must diversify its funding sources to survive long term.

Tedros told reporters he remains in contact with US officials and continues to provide them with information although he has had no direct communication with President Donald Trump.

With a shortfall of nearly $600m this year alone, WHO officials are urging donors to act swiftly. Without renewed support, they warned, the ability to respond to international health emergencies and sustain basic services could collapse.

WASHINGTON — For the second time in recent months, the Food and Drug Administration is bringing back some recently fired employees, including staffers who handle travel bookings for safety inspectors.

More than 20 of the agency’s roughly 60 travel staff will be reinstated, according to two FDA staffers notified of the plan this week, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss confidential agency matters.

Food scientists who test samples for bacteria and study potentially harmful chemicals also have been told they will get their jobs back, but have yet to receive any official confirmation.

The same uncertainty hangs over employees who process agency records for release to lawyers, companies and journalists under the Freedom of Information Act. About 100 of those staffers were recently eliminated, according to an agency official with direct knowledge of the situation.

But in recent days the FDA has missed multiple court-ordered deadlines to produce documents, something that could result in hefty fines. That’s prompted plans to bring back a significant number of those staffers.

The apparent reversals are the latest examples of the haphazard approach to agency cuts that have shrunk FDA’s workforce by an estimated 20%, or about 3,500 jobs, in addition to an unspecified number of retirements, voluntary buyouts and resignations.

In February, the FDA laid off about 700 provisional employees, including food and medical device reviewers, only to rehire many of them within days after pushback from industry officials, members of Congress and others.

The Department of Health and Human Services hasn’t detailed exactly which positions or programs were cut in the mass layoffs.

FDA Commissioner Marty Makary has repeatedly said that no FDA scientists were fired as part of the reductions. But at least two dozen food scientists who worked in a San Francisco testing laboratory and a Chicago research center were let go in March.

An HHS spokesperson suggested the apparent mix-up was due to “the fractured, outdated HR infrastructure we inherited from the Biden administration and are now actively overhauling.” The spokesperson did not respond to specific questions about which employees are being reinstated but said the administration will “streamline operations and fix the broken systems left to us.”

About 15 scientists working in FDA’s Division of Food Processing Science and Technology in Chicago were told last week that they would be reinstated, according to a staffer who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss confidential agency matters. But a week later there has been no written confirmation and the scientists have not returned to the office. The group’s research includes studying ways to prevent harmful bacteria from growing on produce and preventing the spread of microplastics and other particles from food packaging.

“I hope Commissioner Makary continues to assess these ill-informed cuts and works to bring back impacted employees expeditiously,” said Susan Mayne of Yale University, the FDA’s former food director. “His legacy as commissioner is on the line.”

With more than 15,000 employees remaining across various U.S. and foreign offices, the FDA’s core responsibilities are reviewing new drugs, medical products and food ingredients as well as inspecting thousands of factories.

Makary has said no inspectors or medical reviewers were fired as part of the recent reductions. But current and former FDA officials note that those frontline employees are often supported by teams of administrative staff.

FDA inspectors, for example, have long relied on travel bookers to coordinate trips to India and other countries that often involve visa permissions, security measures, ground transportation, tech support, translation services and other logistics. Inspectors can spend up to half the year traveling, a grueling workload that makes recruiting and retaining staff a challenge.

For a brief period last month, inspectors were told they would be booking their own travel. The FDA set up a hotline to assist with making the arrangements. Then, agency leaders developed a plan to hire an outside contractor to perform the work.

On Monday, staffers were informed that about a third of the fired staff who performed the work would be returning.

Perrone writes for the Associated Press. AP reporter JoNel Aleccia contributed to this report.

George Russell says “words don’t mean anything” after a pledge from FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem to revisit the governing body’s ban on drivers swearing.

Ben Sulayem changed the FIA statues in the winter to codify a series of penalties for drivers who either swear or criticise the FIA.

But in an Instagram post this week, the Emirati said he was “considering making improvements” to the rules in question “following constructive feedback from drivers across our seven FIA world championships”.

Mercedes driver Russell, a director of the Grand Prix Drivers’ Association (GPDA), refused to comment on Ben Sulayem’s intervention.

“It’s being considered,” he said. “The words don’t mean anything until the change has been made.”

He said there had been no dialogue with the FIA on the matter – and none since the drivers wrote an open letter in November asking the governing body to treat them like “adults”.

Russell added: “Collectively, we’ve not spoken any further since the open letter that was sent out. Whether that is the response I’m not too sure.

“It would be great if changes were made and the drivers were at least heard and it’s in the best interests of the sport, and ensuring some common sense is applied to it. We can comment on it when we see the action rather than the consideration.”

May 1 (UPI) — Reports say President Donald Trump will nominate National Security adviser Mike Waltz as the nation’s ambassador to the United Nations.

Unnamed sources earlier told Politico, the New York Times, ABC News and other news outlets that Waltz was about to become the first senior-level adviser released by Trump.

Hours after the reports surfaced, Trump announced his plans to nominate Waltz to be the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

Trump also said he will name Secretary of State Marco Rubio to replace Waltz as national security adviser on an interim basis.

The Senate must confirm Waltz’s ambassadorship and his eventual permanent replacement as National Security adviser.

Trump previously nominated Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., to be the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, but she withdrew her consideration for the position.

Stefanik might run for election as New York’s governor, which has led to tensions between her and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., The Hill reported.

Waltz’s possible replacement as National Security adviser had been discussed for weeks within the White House, ABC News reported.

Some have suggested special envoy Steve Witkoff might step into the role if it becomes vacant.

Witkoff is representing the United States in negotiations with Russia, Iran and Hamas to try to end the wars in Ukraine and Gaza.

Other potential replacements include Stephen Miller, who is Trump’s primary policy adviser; Richard Grenell, who is the president’s special envoy for special missions; and Sebastian Gorka, who is the National Security Council’s senior director for counterterrorism, Politico reported.

Deputy National Security Adviser Alex Wong also might leave his position, the news outlets reported.

Waltz is a military veteran, a former member of Congress from Florida from 2019 until 2025, and a former member of the House Armed Services Committee.

Waltz accidentally included The Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg in a secure Signal app chat discussing pending aerial strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen on March 15.

Goldberg afterward reported he had been included in the chat due to a mistake made by a Waltz staffer, who intended to include someone else in the chat and not Goldberg.

The military strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen have continued since March 15.

Trump says they won’t end until the Houthis stop attacking commercial shipping and U.S. military assets in the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden and in the air.

This is a breaking news story. Check back for the latest updates.

PA Media

Remedies rejected by BBC

PA Media

Who is Gerry Adams?

Who was Denis Donaldson?

PA Media

A senior Qatari diplomat told the International Court of Justice that Israel is conducting a “genocidal war against the Palestinian people” and weaponising humanitarian aid. He joined a long list of representatives from governments across the world condemning Israeli actions in its war on Gaza.

A federal judge on Thursday barred the Trump administration from deporting any Venezuelans from South Texas under an 18th-century wartime law and said President Trump’s invocation of it was “unlawful.”

U.S. District Court Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr. is the first judge to rule that the Alien Enemies Act cannot be used against people who, the Republican administration claims, are gang members invading the United States.

“Neither the Court nor the parties question that the Executive Branch can direct the detention and removal of aliens who engage in criminal activity in the United States,” wrote Rodriguez, who was nominated by Trump in 2018. But, the judge said, “the President’s invocation of the AEA through the Proclamation exceeds the scope of the statute and is contrary to the plain, ordinary meaning of the statute’s terms.”

In March, Trump issued a proclamation claiming that the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua was invading the U.S. He said he had special powers to deport immigrants, identified by his administration as gang members, without the usual court proceedings.

“The Court concludes that the President’s invocation of the AEA through the Proclamation exceeds the scope of the statute and, as a result, is unlawful,” Rodriguez wrote.

The Alien Enemies Act has been used only three times before in U.S. history, most recently during World War II, when it was cited to imprison Japanese Americans.

The proclamation triggered a flurry of litigation as the administration tried to ship migrants it claimed were gang members to a notorious prison in El Salvador.

Rodriguez’s ruling is significant because it is the first formal permanent injunction against the administration using the AEA and contends the president is misusing the law. “Congress never meant for this law to be used in this manner,” said Lee Gelernt, the ACLU lawyer who argued the case, in response to the ruling.

Rodriguez agreed, noting that the provision has been used only during the two World Wars and the War of 1812. Trump claimed Tren de Aragua was acting at the behest of the Venezuelan government, but Rodriguez found that the activities the administration accused it of did not amount to an invasion or “predatory incursion,” as the statute requires.

“The Proclamation makes no reference to and in no manner suggests that a threat exists of an organized, armed group of individuals entering the United States at the direction of Venezuela to conquer the country or assume control over a portion of the nation,” Rodriguez wrote. “Thus, the Proclamation’s language cannot be read as describing conduct that falls within the meaning of ‘invasion’ for purposes of the AEA.”

If the administration appeals, it would go first to the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That is among the nation’s most conservative appeals courts and it also has ruled against what it saw as overreach on immigration matters by both the Obama and Biden administrations. In those cases, Democratic administrations had sought to make it easier for immigrants to remain in the U.S.

The administration, as it has in other cases challenging its expansive view of presidential power, could turn to appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, in the form of an emergency motion for a stay pending an appeal.

The Supreme Court already has weighed in once on the issue of deportations under the AEA. The justices held that migrants alleged to be gang members must be given “reasonable time” to contest their removal from the country. The court has not specified the length of time.

It’s possible that the losing side in the 5th Circuit would file an emergency appeal with the justices that also would ask them to short-circuit lower court action in favor of a definitive ruling from the nation’s highest court. Such a decision likely would be months away, at least.

The Texas case is just one piece of a tangle of litigation sparked by Trump’s proclamation.

The ACLU initially filed suit in the nation’s capital to block deportations. U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg issued a temporary hold on removals and ordered the administration turn around planes that had left with detainees headed to El Salvador, a directive that was apparently ignored. Later, the Supreme Court weighed in.

The justices stepped in again late last month with an unusual postmidnight order halting deportations from North Texas, where the ACLU contended the administration was preparing for another round of flights to El Salvador.

Riccardi writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Lindsay Whitehurst and Mark Sherman contributed to this report.

The proposed Dodger Stadium gondola hit a major roadblock Thursday, when a state appeals court rejected Metro’s approval of the environmental impact report for the project.

The project, proposed in 2018 by former Dodgers owner Frank McCourt, requires approval from Metro, the Los Angeles City Council, Caltrans and the state parks agency.

None of the other approvals have been obtained, and the court decision Thursday requires Metro to “set aside its certification of the EIR” and “set aside its approval of the project” until a revised environmental impact report can be completed.

The gondola would run from Union Station to Dodger Stadium and would cost $385 million to $500 million to build and another $8 million to $10 million per year to operate and maintain, according to the report. Those costs, it said, could be covered by private bond financing, sponsorships, naming rights and fares — although fans have been promised free rides to Dodger games.

Metro approved the environmental impact report 15 months ago. The California Endowment and the Los Angeles Parks Alliance sued to throw out the report, on the basis Metro had not properly followed state environmental laws in approving it. The bid was denied by the Los Angeles Superior Court last August, but the plaintiffs won their appeal Thursday.

Joseph Kabila denies charges of treason and war crimes amid escalating tensions in volatile eastern provinces.

Authorities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) have asked the Senate to lift the immunity of former President Joseph Kabila so he could face trial on charges of supporting a rebel uprising in the country’s east, the justice minister says.

Constant Mutamba told reporters in the capital, Kinshasa, on Wednesday evening that authorities have amassed clear evidence implicating the former president in “war crimes, crimes against humanity and massacres of peaceful civilians and military personnel” in the east.

Mutamba said the attorney general of Congo’s army has asked the Senate to revoke the lifetime immunity from prosecution that Kabila enjoys as a former president and senator.

The former president is accused of “treason, war crimes, crimes against humanity and participation in an insurrectional movement”, the justice minister added.

His successor, President Felix Tshisekedi, last year alleged Kabila was supporting the M23 rebels and “preparing an insurrection” in the eastern DRC with them, a claim Kabila denied.

Kabila led the DRC from 2001 to 2019, taking office at the age of 29 and extending his mandate by delaying elections for two years after his term ended in 2016. His father, former President Laurent Kabila, was assassinated in 2001.

Last month, he returned to the DRC after having left in 2023 in part due to deteriorating relations with the government of Tshisekedi. He arrived in the rebel-held eastern city of Goma, where he planned to “participate in peace efforts”, according to one of his associates.

Fighting in the eastern DRC surged once again in January, and the M23 have captured the key cities of Goma and Bukavu, leaving devastation in their wake.

The fighting has killed about 3,000 people and worsened what was already one of the world’s largest humanitarian crises with about seven million people displaced.

M23 is one of about 200 armed groups vying for a foothold in the mineral-rich eastern DRC near the border with Rwanda. The rebels are supported by about 4,000 soldiers from neighbouring Rwanda, according to UN experts.

Despite the DRC’s army and M23 having agreed to work towards a truce this month, fighting continues in the eastern province of South Kivu.

Ferdinand Kambere, the deputy secretary-general of Kabila’s People’s Party for Reconstruction and Democracy, said the justice minister’s actions amount to “relentless persecution”.

“For us, these mistakes that those in power keep making against the former president, thinking they are humiliating or intimidating him, actually show that the regime is nearing its end. They have nothing left to use against Kabila,” Kambere told The Associated Press news agency.

Saul “Canelo” Alvarez, one of the most popular and highest-paid athletes, is set to face an unbeaten challenger, William Scull, in a highly anticipated boxing fight that will crown the men’s undisputed super middleweight champion of the world.

The bout will take Alvarez to Saudi Arabia for the first time as part of his deal with Riyadh Season and will present him with a chance to regain his IBF belt.

Here’s what you need to know about the fight:

When is the Alvarez vs Scull fight?

The fight is scheduled for Saturday, May 3.

Where is the Alvarez vs Scull fight taking place?

The ANB Arena in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, will host the fight.

What’s the Alvarez vs Scull fight start time?

The pre-fight events, followed by the undercard fights, will get under way at 18:00 GMT.

Ring walks for the main fight are not expected to begin before 22:00 GMT.

How can I follow and stream the Alvarez vs Scull fight live?

Al Jazeera Sport’s live coverage of the pre-fight build-up and undercard results will begin at 17:00 GMT, followed by a comprehensive text and photo blow-by-blow account of the main fight at 22:00 GMT.

The fight will be streamed live on DAZN pay-per-view.

Who is on the undercard?

The fight night, titled “Fatal Fury”, boasts a strong undercard with a rematch between Bruno Surace and Jaime Munguia the pick of the fights.

Marco Verde, Mexico’s silver medallist at the Paris Olympics 2024, will also make his professional debut on the night with his light middleweight fight against compatriot Michel Polina.

Here’s what the undercard looks like:

• Jaime Munguia vs Bruno Surace – super middleweight
• Martin Bakole vs Efe Ajagba – heavyweight
• Badou Jack vs Norair Mikaeljan – cruiserweight
• Marco Verde vs Michel Polina – light middleweight
• Brayan Leon vs Aaron Guerrero – middleweight

What is the fight purse?

While the official fight purse has not been announced, Canelo is set to earn $80m from the fight, according to Spanish sports newspaper Marca.

Who is Canelo Alvarez?

One of the most famous fighters of the current era, Alvarez is a professional boxer from Guadalajara, Mexico. Better known as simply Canelo, the 34-year-old began fighting, aged 15, in 2005 and turned pro five years later. Coming from a rural background, the Mexican has built a reputation as one of the world’s best boxers, with a worth of $275m, according to Forbes magazine.

Alvarez has fought in multiple weight classes – from welterweight to light heavyweight – and has held belts in four of these divisions.

At a height of 1.75 metres, an orthodox stance and a reach of 70.5 inches, Alvarez has pummelled many famous opponents in his 15-year professional career.

He’s currently the world’s top-ranked super middleweight boxer and in possession of the World Boxing Association (WBA), World Boxing Council (WBC) and World Boxing Organisation (WBO) belts.

In his last professional fight in September 2024, Alvarez beat challenger Edgar Berlanga by a unanimous points decision in three rounds.

Who is William Scull?

Born in Matanzas, Cuba, Scull turned professional at the age of 24 and enjoys an unbeaten record in his pro career.

The 32-year-old became the International Boxing Federation’s super middleweight champion in 2024 when Alvarez relinquished his belt.

Scull fights with an orthodox stance and with a reach of 73 inches, the Cuban is a formidable figure in the ring.

His last fight, against Vladimir Shishkin, in October 2024, earned him the vacant IBF super middleweight belt.

Which boxing belts are Canelo Alvarez and William Scull fighting for?

The fight is set to unify the WBC, WBA and WBO super middleweight titles held by Alvarez with Scull’s IBF belt, which was relinquished by Alvarez.

What’s Alvarez’s fight record?

• Fights: 66
• Wins: 62
• Wins by knockout: 39
• Losses: 2
• Draws: 2

What’s Scull’s fight record?

• Fights: 23
• Wins: 23
• Wins by knockout: 9
• Losses: 0
• Draws: 0

What has Canelo Alvarez said about the fight?

The fighters have exchanged indirect words on what to expect from the bout on Saturday, with Alvarez dismissing Scull’s claims of eating the Mexican.

“He’s going to eat punches, that’s what he’s going to eat,” Alvarez told iFL TV on Wednesday.

The famous boxer has previously said he will treat the bout with importance, as it presents him with the opportunity to fight in a different country.

“That motivates myself – fighting in another country. I feel great about it. This fight is very important to me. I never take anything easy.”

What has Scull said about the fight?

Meanwhile, Scull has said he doesn’t want to be disrespectful towards his opponent but will “eat him” in the ring.

“I’m here to win and that’s it,” the challenger said on Tuesday.

“I’m going to eat him. Now, I’m focused on what I have to do. I’m very excited because I’m here to shut some mouths and do what I have to do.”

Why did Alvarez pull out of his fight with Jake Paul?

When the Mexican boxing icon passed up a speculated bout with the YouTube personality and boxer Jake Paul in favour of a deal with Riyadh Season in February, Paul termed him “a money-hungry squirrel” chasing his “next nut”.

Alvarez signed a four-fight deal with Riyadh Season, with his upcoming bout against Scull being the first one.

Alvarez would have been an astronomical favourite to beat Paul, who beat Mike Tyson in November 2024.