Donald Trump

May 18 (UPI) — Against the backdrop of Pope Leo XIV’s first papal mass Sunday, Vice President JD Vance met privately with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky about achieving a stand down in the war that has waged since Russia’s 2023 invasion of Ukraine.

It’s the first face to face meeting between the two leaders since the infamous February meeting in the Oval Office that erupted into verbal attacks, finger pointing and taunts by President Donald Trump.

The meeting between Vance and Zelenksy was overshadowed by Moscow’s large scale drone attack on Ukraine just hours prior. There are also reports that Russia may be planning a nuclear attack as it ramps up efforts to intimidate Kyiv and its allies.

Zelensky called the meeting “good,” and posted photos of smiling Ukrainian and U.S. officials gathered around an outside table.

“I reaffirmed that Ukraine is ready to be engaged in real diplomacy and underscored the importance of a full and unconditional ceasefire as soon as possible,” Zelensky said.

Trump is scheduled to talk with Zelensky Monday, and Trump has also said he plans to have a similar conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Leaders of Britain, Germany, France and Poland planned to speak with Trump before the U.S. president’s Monday phone call with Putin, German chancellor Friedrich Merz told reporters in Rome on Sunday.

“I spoke with Marco Rubio, including about the call tomorrow,” Merz said, referring to the U.S. Secretary of State. “We agreed that we will speak again with the four state leaders and the US president in preparation for this conversation.”

The latest efforts at achieving a ceasefire come as the first direct talks between Kyiv and Moscow failed to make any headway in ending the war, which started with Russia’s full scale invasion of the Ukrainian port city of Mariupol in February, 2022.

South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa will begin a state visit to the United States on Monday in what his government describes as an attempt to “reset” the relationship between the two countries, which many experts say has become the frostiest in decades.

The visit comes just days after the US welcomed a group of 59 white South African “refugees” who President Donald Trump claims are being persecuted in South Africa because of their race, and are facing a “genocide”. They flew to the US on a special relocation plan and will be allowed to settle there.

Ramaphosa’s government denies those allegations and says whites, who own more than 70 percent of the land despite making up just 7 percent of the population, are not discriminated against.

In a statement, Ramaphosa’s office said the two leaders would discuss “bilateral” and “global issues of interest”. The White House has not yet made a statement regarding the meeting.

This is the first time Trump will host an African leader at the White House since he took office in January. South Africa, which currently presides over the G20, will hand over leadership to the US in November.

Here’s the timeline of the anticipated meeting, as well as a breakdown of the main issues which have caused tension and are most likely to be tabled:

When is the meeting?

Ramaphosa will travel on Monday, May 19, and will meet with Trump at the White House on Wednesday, May 21.

His office did not share an agenda for the talks, but said that “the president’s visit to the US provides a platform to reset the strategic relationship between the two countries”.

The agenda is expected to include the treatment of white South Africans, aid cuts and the ongoing wars in Ukraine and Gaza.

What will Trump and Ramaphosa discuss?

The agenda is expected to include the following subjects:

Treatment of white South Africans

The issue of relations between South Africa’s historically advantaged white minority population and Ramaphosa’s Black-led government has been the most touchy one between the two governments.

White Afrikaners are descendants of mainly Dutch colonisers who, until 1990, controlled the country under an apartheid system that segregated and excluded the Black majority. Many of the most successful business leaders and farm owners in the country are still white. More than half of the Black population is categorised as poor.

Trump and his billionaire ally, South African-born Elon Musk, have severely criticised the Ramaphosa administration’s alleged poor treatment of these white people in the country, following Ramaphosa’s signing into law of an Expropriation Bill which allows the government to confiscate land, in some instances, without compensation. The law, signed in January, allows expropriation from any land owner for redistribution to marginalised groups such as women and people with disabilities.

Some Afrikaner groups say the law could allow their land to be redistributed to some of the country’s Black majority.

Trump has highlighted allegations by a group of white South Africans who fear that their land will be seized. This group also says white farmers face a disproportionate number of violent assaults, which have led to several deaths and amount to a “genocide”.

The South African government has denied that there is a genocide and says the attacks are part of a wider crime problem. Speaking at the Africa CEO forum in Abidjan in Ivory Coast on May 13, Ramaphosa said the US government “has got the wrong end of the stick”, as South Africa suffers overall from high rates of violent crime, regardless of the race of victims. Both white and Black farmers have been targeted in farm attacks, in which armed criminals have assaulted, robbed and sometimes murdered farm workers in usually remote locations.

Meanwhile, Musk, who is the founder of internet company Starlink, also blames the government for the company’s failure to launch in South Africa because of its Black empowerment laws which require that large corporations and businesses seeking government contracts be owned in part by marginalised groups such as Black people.

In a March post on his X social media platform, Musk said Starlink was not allowed to launch “because I am not black”. Officials have denied these allegations and say the country’s business laws are meant to right historical wrongs.

Tariffs and aid cuts to South Africa

Since re-entering the White House in January, Trump has implemented a triple whammy of economic policies that have hit South Africa hard.

First were the sweeping aid cuts the US announced after Trump signed an executive order pausing foreign aid to all countries for at least 90 days.

That disrupted funding for treatment and research in South Africa for deadly communicable diseases like HIV. South Africa has the largest number of people living with HIV in the world, and until then, the US provided about 18 percent of the government’s HIV budget. In 2023, the US provided $462m in HIV aid. Since January, some HIV treatment programmes have remained cut, while others have had their funding reinstated, although it’s unclear how many.

In February, Trump ordered that additional financial aid be cut specifically to South Africa over what he said was “unjust racial discrimination”, citing the alleged confiscation of white-owned land. He also cited South Africa’s filing of its genocide case against Israel over its war on Gaza at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in December 2023. Details of the further aid cuts were not made public.

Finally, South Africa has also been hit by Trump’s tariff war. The country was slapped with a 30 percent tariff on all goods in April. An additional 25 percent tariff was placed on South African-made vehicles entering the US, putting vehicle surcharges at 55 percent.

Ramaphosa described Trump’s actions as “punitive” and said the tariffs would “serve as a barrier to trade and shared prosperity”.

Although Trump paused reciprocal tariffs for most countries (including South Africa) for 90 days on April 9, South Africa’s government wants tariffs to be permanently dropped. South Africa also still faces the baseline 10 percent tariff on goods that Trump has imposed on all countries.

The US is South Africa’s second-largest bilateral trading partner after China. Under the duty-free Africa Growth Opportunity Act introduced in 2000, South Africa sells precious stones, steel products and cars to the US, and buys crude oil, electrical goods and aircraft in return.

The AGOA framework, which includes 32 African countries, is up for renewal this year, but it’s unclear if Trump’s White House will follow through with it.

Israel-Gaza ICJ case and Gaza War

The South African government filed its genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on December 29, 2023, accusing it of “genocidal acts” during its assaults on Gaza, to the anger of Israel’s ally and major weapons supplier, the US.

The landmark case highlighted the African country’s vocal and visible support for the Palestinian cause and was the first court case against Israel in the ongoing war in Gaza. Hearings began in January 2024. In March 2024, the ICJ issued an emergency order that Israel ensure food aid deliveries into Gaza and cease its offensive in Rafah.

Both Joe Biden’s and Trump’s administrations in the US have opposed South Africa’s move, with Trump denouncing Pretoria’s “aggressiveness”. On February 7, Donald Trump signed an executive order pausing aid to the country. The order cited the ICJ case, the Afrikaner issue and South Africa’s alleged collaboration with Iran to develop nuclear weapons.

South Africa, meanwhile, has promised not to withdraw its case despite this backlash. Foreign minister Ronald Lamola told The Financial Times in February that there was “no chance” the country would back down.

“Standing by our principles sometimes has consequences, but we remain firm that this is important for the world and the rule of law,” he said.

Ukraine-Russia War

Trump and Ramaphosa are also expected to discuss peace and mediation efforts in the Ukraine-Russia war as representatives of the two countries hold talks for the first time since the war began in February 2022.

The Trump administration has taken a lead role in mediating between Russia and Ukraine. During his election campaign, Trump promised to negotiate an end to the war “within 24 hours” if elected. Much of that effort, seen by some as aggressive, has fallen flat, however. A state visit to the US by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy ended with Trump and his deputy, JD Vance, shouting at their guest in February this year.

South Africa, meanwhile, has opted to stay neutral in the conflict and has called for dialogue between the sides. The country is a historical ally of Russia because of the former Soviet Union’s support during apartheid. Both are also founding members of the growing BRICS alliance of economies, alongside India, Brazil and China, which some see as a rival to the G5 group of richest countries.

South Africa has not condemned Russia or Putin for the invasion of Ukraine, and has abstained from a United Nations resolution that did so.

At the same time, Pretoria has remained friendly with Ukraine. In April, Ramaphosa hosted Zelenskyy during a state visit during which they discussed increasing trade and the ongoing war, with the Ukrainian leader calling for more pressure on Moscow.

Hours before Zelenskyy met with Ramaphosa, the South African leader said he spoke over the phone with Trump, and they both agreed that the war needed to stop.

Nonpartisan analysts say bill would add $3-5tn to the nation’s $36.2tn debt over the next decade.

United States President Donald Trump’s sweeping tax-cut bill has won approval from a key congressional committee to advance towards possible passage in the House of Representatives later this week.

The rare Sunday night vote marks a big win for Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson, after hardline Republican conservatives on Friday blocked the bill from clearing the House Budget Committee over a dispute involving spending cuts to the Medicaid healthcare programme for lower-income Americans and the repeal of green energy tax credits.

Four hardline members of the committee’s 21 Republicans allowed the legislation to advance by voting “present”. The bill passed in a 17-16 vote, with all Democrats voting against it.

The hardliners had spent much of the day in closed-door negotiations with House Republican leaders and White House officials.

Johnson met with Republican lawmakers shortly before the meeting, telling reporters that the changes agreed to were “just some minor modifications. Not a huge thing.”

Republican House Budget Chairman Jodey Arrington said he expects deliberations to continue on into the week, “right up until the time we put this big, beautiful bill before the House”.

Nonpartisan analysts say the bill, which would extend the 2017 tax cuts that were Trump’s signature first-term legislative win, would add $3 trillion to $5 trillion to the $36.2 trillion national debt over the next decade.

Credit ratings agency Moody’s cited the rising debt, which it said was on track to reach 134 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035, for its decision on Friday to downgrade the US’s credit rating.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in an interview with CNN on Sunday that the bill would spur economic growth sufficient to offset any growth in the debt, adding that he did not put much credence in Moody’s downgrade.

Economic experts have warned that the downgrade – following previous downgrades by Fitch Ratings and S&P – is a clear sign that the US has too much debt and lawmakers need to either increase revenues or spend less.

Trump’s Republicans hold a 220-213 majority in the House, and are divided over how deeply to slash spending to offset the cost of the tax cuts.

Hardliners want cuts to Medicaid, which some Republican senators have pushed back against, saying it would hurt the very voters who elected Trump in November, and whose support they will need in 2026 when control of Congress is again up for grabs.

The bill’s cuts would kick 8.6 million people off Medicaid.

It also aims to eliminate taxes on tips and some overtime income – both Trump campaign promises – while boosting defence spending and providing more funds for Trump’s border crackdown.

Democratic US Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut said the credit rating cut spelled trouble for Americans.

“That is a big deal. That means that we are likely headed for a recession,” Murphy told NBC’s Meet the Press.

“These guys are running the economy recklessly.”

May 18 (UPI) — The House Budget Committee advanced President Donald Trump‘s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” in a rare Sunday night vote.

They met at 10 p.m. to consider the bill that extends Trump’s tax cuts, increases border funding priorities and requires Medicaid recipients to work.

The measure passed 17-16 along party lines, with four Republicans who rejected the bill the first time on Friday voting present Sunday: Ralph Norman of Oklagoa, Chip Roy of Texas, Andrew Clyde of Georgia and Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma. They voted against the bill Friday, preventing it from advancing then.

Roy said he voted present “out of respect for the Republican Conference and the president,” but doesn’t support the bill as it stands.

He posted on X: “The bill does not yet meet the moment — leaving almost half of the green new scam subsidies continuing. More, it fails to end the Medicaid money laundering scam and perverse funding structure that provides seven times more federal dollars for each dollar of state spending for the able-bodied relative to the vulnerable. This all ultimately increases the likelihood of continuing deficits and non-Obamacare-expansion states like Texas expanding in the future. We can and must do better before we pass the final product.”

He is looking forward to getting the bill way he wants it. “It gives us the opportunity to work together this week to get the job done in light of the fact our bond rating was dropped yet again due to historic fiscal mismanagement by both parties,” he wrote. “This bill is a strong step forward.”

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Ky., said he was pleased the bill advances.

“There’s a lot more work to do, we’ve always acknowledged that towards the end there will be more details to iron out, we have several more to take care of,” Johnson said. “But I’m looking forward to very thoughtful discussions, very productive discussions over the next few days, and I am absolutely convinced we’re going to get this in final form and pass it in accordance with our original deadline, and that was to do it before Memorial Day.

“So this will be a victory out of committee tonight, everybody will make a vote that allows us to proceed and that was my big request tonight.”

The bill for fiscal year 2026, which begins Oct. 1, is 1,116 pages and is worth roughly $7 trillion. The last time Congress passed all 12 regular appropriations bills on time, before the start of a new fiscal year, was in 1996. Since then, Congress has relied heavily on continuing resolutions and omnibus appropriations bills to fund the government.

In fiscal year 2024, the federal government spent $6.8 trillion.

Before the meeting, Johnson said on Fox News Sunday he was optimistic the bill will past the House by the end of this week. Some Republican hardliners and moderates have opposed the bill along with all Democrats.

“We’re on track, working around the clock to deliver this nation-shaping legislation for the American people as soon as possible,” Johnson said. “All 11 of our committees have wrapped up their work, and they spent less and saved more than even we’ve projected initially. This really is a once-in-a-generation opportunity that we have here.”

The bill next gets put before the Rules Committee with a 9-4 Republican majority including Norman and Roy. In the full House, Republicans have just a 220-213 advantage with two vacancies after two Democrats died.

“It’s very important for people to understand why we’re being so aggressive on the timetable and why this really is so important,” Johnson said earlier Sunday. “This is the vehicle through which we will deliver on the mandate the American people gave us during the last election. You’re going to have historic savings for the American people, historic tax relief for American workers, historic investments in border security.

“At the same time, we’re restoring American energy dominance, and we’re rebuilding the defense industrial base, and we’re ensuring that programs like Medicaid and SNAP are strengthened for U.S. citizens who need and deserve them and not being squandered away by illegal aliens and persons who are ineligible to receive them and are cheating the system.”

On Friday, Budget Committee hard-liners blocked the package from moving forward — mainly over when Medicaid work requirements will commence. Under the current legislation, Medicaid requirements will kick in during 2029. Some conservatives want it to start as soon as 2027.

Norman, who voted against advancing the bill, earlier told CNN on Saturday that the earlier date was necessary for his vote.

The Center on Budget and Policies Priorities estimates 36 million Medicaid enrollees could be at risk of losing coverage because of potential work requirements and other factors.

In December, there were 78,532,341 on Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, according to the agency. That includes 71,275,237 enrolled in Medicaid and 7,257,104 in CHIPS.

“Some of the states have — it takes them some time,” Johnson said. “We’ve learned in this process to change their systems and to make sure that these stringent requirements that we will put on that to eliminate fraud, waste and abuse, can actually be implemented. So, we’re working with them [hardliners] to make sure what the earliest possible date is to put into law something that will actually be useful. I think we’ve got to compromise on that. I think we’ll work it out,” Johnson claimed.”

If the House passes a bill, it goes to the Senate. Johnson said he hopes the Senate won’t alter the bill, which means it goes back to the House.

“The package that we send over there will be one that was very carefully negotiated and delicately balanced, and we hope that they [Senate] don’t make many modifications to it, because that will ensure its passage quickly,” he said.

Holdouts also want to accelerate the phasing out of tax credits for green energy projects under the Inflation Reduction Act.

The bill also includes a big increase for the Defense Department and to national security. There are cuts to federal health and nutrition programs and energy programs.

It’s a balancing act for Johnson because some changes may anger House moderates. They are phasing out the tax credits and cuts to Medicaid benefits. Trump has vowed not to cut Medicaid.

Some swing-district House Republicans want to raise the tax rate on top earners to offset the cost of lifting the cap on how much their constituents can deduct in their state and local taxes, known as SALT.

“Allowing the top tax rate to expire and returning from 37% to 39.6% for individuals earning $609,350 or more and married couples earning $731,200 or more breathes $300 billion of new life into the One Big, Beautiful Bill,” Rep. Nick LaLota of New York told CNN on Saturday.

May 18 (UPI) — Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday night allowed the immediate resumption of humanitarian aid, including food and medicine, for Palestinians in Gaza.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich was among the leaders opposing the decision, but the security cabinet did not take a vote on the matter.

“On the recommendation of the IDF, and out of the operational need to enable the expansion of the intense fighting to defeat Hamas, Israel will introduce a basic amount of food to the population in order to ensure that a famine crisis does not develop in the Gaza Strip,” the Prime Minister’s Office said in a statement obtained by the Jerusalem Post and The Times of Israel. “Such a crisis would jeopardize the continuation of the ‘Gideon Chariots’ operation to defeat Hamas.”

He concluded: “Israel will work to deny Hamas the ability to take control of the distribution of humanitarian aid to ensure that the aid does not reach Hamas terrorists.”

Several international organizations will provide assistance until a mechanism begins operations on Saturday, two senior Israeli officials told the Jerusalem Post.

Walla reported that initial aid organizations include the United Nations World Food Program and the World Central Kitchen, as well as the United Arab Emirates.

Israel has been ramping up its airstrikes in an attempt to defeat the militant Hamas and have the hostages released. Earlier Sunday, the IDF launched strikes on sites, including the last remaining functional hospital in northern Gaza.

More than 100 people died overnight.

Since the cease-fire between Israel and militant-run Hamas ended on March 1, Israel has frozen all supplies of food, water and medicine to the region of an estimated 2.5 million people.

The United Nations said Gazans are at a “critical risk of famine” with 1 in 5, or 500,000, facing starvation as the war rages since Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

U.S. President Donald Trump has pressured Israel to allow aid in the region. “A lot of people are starving in Gaza,” Trump said Friday while in the United Arab Emirates. “There’s a lot of bad things going on.”

Gaza Humanitarian Foundation said Wednesday that the Israel government will allow the new aid group to deliver aid to Israel

The foundation said it is in the final stages of committing more than 300 million meals for the initial 90 days. The estimated cost is $1.30 per pre-packaged meal, including procurement, logistics, distribution and security. Also provided will be hygiene kits and medical supplies to “move through tightly controlled corridors, monitored in real time to prevent diversion.

Available food is not only in short supply but costs have risen significantly since February. For example, a 55-pound sack of wheat flour now costs between $235 and $520, representing a 3,000 percent price rise in three months.”

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has discussed the war in Ukraine with leaders of the United States, Italy, France and Germany, a 10 Downing Street spokesperson has said, in advance of US President Donald Trump’s planned call with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, on Monday.

The flurry of diplomacy comes shortly after inconclusive direct Russia-Ukraine talks in Istanbul, Turkiye on Friday.

The leaders discussed the need for an unconditional ceasefire and for Putin to take peace talks seriously, the spokesperson said late on Sunday, adding that they also raised the use of sanctions if Russia failed to engage seriously in a ceasefire and concerted peace talks.

In remarks to reporters earlier on Sunday, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said he discussed the issue with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio while the two men were attending the inaugural mass of Pope Leo XIV at the Vatican. Merz said he also spoke at length at the Vatican with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

“I spoke with Marco Rubio, including about the call tomorrow. We agreed that we will speak again with the four state leaders and the US president in preparation of this conversation [with Putin],” Merz said.

Trump said he planned to speak to Putin and Zelenskyy to discuss ways to stop the war’s “bloodbath”.

In Moscow, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed to Russian news agencies that preparations were under way for a conversation between Putin and Trump.

The talks in the Turkish city of Istanbul on Friday were the first time the sides had held face-to-face talks since March 2022, weeks after Russia’s full-scale invasion of its neighbour.

The brief talks yielded only an agreement to swap 1,000 prisoners of war, according to the heads of both delegations, in what would be their biggest such exchange since the war began.

A senior Ukrainian official familiar with the talks said Russian negotiators demanded Ukraine pull its troops out of all Ukrainian regions claimed by Moscow before they would agree to a ceasefire. That is a red line for Ukraine, and as it stands, Russia does not have full control in those regions.

Meanwhile, Zelenskyy met US Vice President JD Vance and Rubio on the sidelines of the papal inauguration, according to a source in the Ukrainian delegation. It was the first meeting between Zelenskyy and Vance since they publicly clashed during talks at the White House in February over the future of the war in Ukraine.

Ukraine fears ballistic missile attack

In the meantime, Ukraine has claimed Russia is planning to launch an intercontinental ballistic missile late on Sunday to intimidate it and its Western allies.

Ukraine’s military intelligence agency, GUR, said Russia was planning to conduct a “training and combat” launch of the missile.

GUR said in a statement on the Telegram app that the launch was ordered to be implemented from Russia’s Sverdlovsk region, adding that the flight range for the missile was more than 10,000km (6,200 miles).

Ukraine on Sunday also said Russia had launched a record number of drones overnight, targeting various regions, including that of the capital, where a woman was killed.

Its air force said Russia launched “273 Shahed attack drones and various types of imitator drones”, of which 88 were destroyed and 128 went astray, “without negative consequences”.

Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko said it was a “record” number of drones. “Russia has a clear goal – to continue killing civilians,” she said.

Al Jazeera’s Zein Basravi, reporting from Kyiv, said overnight, “air raid sirens began, and they went on for nearly nine hours”.

“We see these massive drone strikes and we see crowds of people seeking shelter, seeking safety, in those deep underground subway stations in the capital and in other areas of the country, once again,” Basravi said.

‘Deliberate killing of civilians’

The Russian military said it intercepted 25 Ukrainian drones overnight and on Sunday morning. It also claimed it had captured Bahatyr, another village in eastern Ukraine’s Donetsk region, as it intensifies the war effort despite the talks.

Russia’s overnight drone attacks were roundly condemned by Ukrainian officials.

Zelenskyy reiterated his call for stronger sanctions on Moscow after a Russian drone killed nine bus passengers in the Sumy region of northeastern Ukraine on Saturday. “This was a deliberate killing of civilians,” he said.

“Pressure must be exerted on Russia to stop the killings. Without tougher sanctions, without stronger pressure, Russia will not seek real diplomacy.”

Russia, which denies targeting civilians, said it struck a military target in Sumy. Its Ministry of Defence claimed another settlement was captured in eastern Ukraine.

Zelenskyy’s top aide, Andriy Yermak, also decried the attacks.

“For Russia, the negotiations in Istanbul are just a pretence. Putin wants war,” Yermak said.

Russia aims to ‘create conditions for lasting peace’

In an interview with Russian state TV, Putin said Moscow’s aim was to “eliminate the causes that triggered this crisis, create the conditions for a lasting peace and guarantee Russia’s security”, without elaborating further.

Russia’s references to the “root causes” of the conflict typically refer to alleged grievances with Kyiv and the West that Moscow has put forward as justification for launching the invasion in February 2022.

They include pledges to “de-Nazify” and demilitarise Ukraine, protect Russian speakers in the country’s east, push back against NATO expansion and stop Ukraine’s westward geopolitical drift.

Ukraine and the West have rejected all of these reasons, saying Russia’s offensive is nothing more than an imperial-style land grab.

Tens of thousands have been killed since Russia started the war, with millions forced to flee their homes.

Putin said the Russian army, which occupies about 20 percent of Ukraine, had the “troops and means required” to achieve its goals.

The US Department of State said in a statement that Rubio and his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, spoke with each other on Saturday. During the call, Rubio welcomed the prisoner exchange agreement reached in Istanbul, the department’s spokesperson said.

Ukraine’s top negotiator, Defence Minister Rustem Umerov, said the “next step” would be a meeting between the two warring presidents.

Russia said it had taken note of the request, but added that the swap of prisoners of war had to be completed first, and both sides then needed to present their visions for a ceasefire before the next round of negotiations could be arranged.

May 18 (UPI) — The House Budget Committee has scheduled a rare Sunday night session in an attempt to advance President Donald Trump‘s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.”

The panel of 21 Republicans and 16 Democrats plans to convene at 10 p.m. Committee passage of the bill is necessary to put it on the floor for a vote later this week and before Memorial Day. Congress needs to pass the budget bill by July, mainly because of a deadline in mid-July to address the debt limit and avoid a default.

The bill for fiscal year 2026, which begins Oct. 1, is 1,116 pages and roughly $7 trillion. The last time Congress passed all 12 regular appropriations bills on time, before the start of a new fiscal year, was in 1996. Since then, Congress has relied heavily on continuing resolutions and omnibus appropriations bills to fund the government.

In fiscal year 2024, the federal government spent $6.8 trillion.

House Speaker Mike Johnson said on Fox News Sunday that Republicans still are “on track” to pass the bill by the end of this week. Some Republican hardliners and moderates have opposed to the bill along with all Democrats.

“We’re on track, working around the clock to deliver this nation-shaping legislation for the American people as soon as possible,” Johnson said. “All 11 of our committees have wrapped up their work, and they spent less and saved more than even we’ve projected initially. This really is a once-in-a-generation opportunity that we have here.”

If the Budget Committee passes the bill, it goes before the Rules Committee. In the House, Republicans have a 220-213 majority with two vacancies after two Democrats died.

“It’s very important for people to understand why we’re being so aggressive on the timetable and why this really is so important,” Johnson said. “This is the vehicle through which we will deliver on the mandate the American people gave us during the last election. You’re going to have historic savings for the American people, historic tax relief for American workers, historic investments in border security.

“At the same time, we’re restoring American energy dominance, and we’re rebuilding the defense industrial base, and we’re ensuring that programs like Medicaid and SNAP are strengthened for U.S. citizens who need and deserve them and not being squandered away by illegal aliens and persons who are ineligible to receive them and are cheating the system.”

On Friday, Budget Committee hard-liners blocked the package from moving forward — mainly over when Medicaid work requirements will commence. Under the current legislation, Medicaid requirements will kick in during 2029. Some conservatives want it to start as soon as 2027.

South Carolina Rep. Ralph Norman, who voted against advancing the bill, told CNN on Saturday that the earlier date was necessary for his vote. Another key budget holdouts are Chip Roy of Texas, Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma and Andrew Clyde of Georgia.

The Center on Budget and Policies Priorities estimates 36 million Medicaid enrollees could be at risk of losing coverage because of potential work requirements and other factors.

In December, there were 78,532,341 on Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, according to the agency. That includes 71,275,237 enrolled in Medicaid and 7,257,104 in CHIPS.

“Some of the states have — it takes them some time,” Johnson said. “We’ve learned in this process to change their systems and to make sure that these stringent requirements that we will put on that to eliminate fraud, waste and abuse, can actually be implemented. So, we’re working with them [hardliners] to make sure what the earliest possible date is to put into law something that will actually be useful. I think we’ve got to compromise on that. I think we’ll work it out,” Johnson claimed.”

If the House passes a bill, it goes to the Senate. Johnson said he hopes the Senate won’t alter the bill, which means it goes back to the House.

“The package that we send over there will be one that was very carefully negotiated and delicately balanced, and we hope that they [Senate] don’t make many modifications to it, because that will ensure its passage quickly,” he said.

Holdouts also want to accelerate the phasing out of tax credits for green energy projects under the Inflation Reduction Act.

The bill also includes a big increase for the Defense Department and to national security. There are cuts to federal health and nutrition programs and energy programs.

It’s a balancing act for Johnson because some changes may anger House moderates. They are phasing out the tax credits and cuts to Medicaid benefits. Trump has vowed not to cut Medicaid.

Someswing-district House Republicans want to raise the tax rate on top earners to offset the cost of lifting the cap on how much their constituents can deduct in their state and local taxes, known as SALT.

“Allowing the top tax rate to expire and returning from 37% to 39.6% for individuals earning $609,350 or more and married couples earning $731,200 or more breathes $300 billion of new life into the One Big, Beautiful Bill,” Rep. Nick LaLota of New York told CNN on Saturday.

May 18 (UPI) — The United States may impose regional tariffs rather than issue blanket ones as a deadline approaches for racing a global plan, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Sunday.

The Trump administration originally said it would impose 90 deals in 90 days, but has backed down recently, acknowledging the complexities of negotiating trade pacts with dozens of countries on a compressed timeline, despite stepped-up efforts, President Donald Trump said during his recent trip to the Middle East.

“But it’s not possible to meet the number of people that want to see us,” Trump explained.

Trump said while in the Middle East that he and Commerce Secretary Scott Lutnick would begin advising some countries on U.S. plans for tariffs in the next two to three weeks.

During an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Bessent said the United States will focus on a short list of countries in its initial round of tariffs.

“My other sense is that we will do a lot of regional deals,” Bessent said. “This is the rate for Central America, this is the rate for this part of Africa, but what we are focused on right now is the 18 important trading relationships.”

Following a move by Moody’s Ratings last week to downgrade the United States’ credit rating, Bessent called the service a “lagging indicator” during an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

“I think that’s what everyone thinks of credit agencies,” he said, and asserted that the credit downgrade was in response to Biden fiscal policies.

In response to concerns about tariff costs being passed on to consumers, Trump has said large merchants like WalMart, which imports a significant amount of its merchandise from China, should instead absorb the price increases.

Bessent said Sunday that WalMart CEO Doug McMillion told him that the retail giant would “eat some of the tariffs” as it had done in previous years.

Bessent did not offer a specific date for the tariff imposition.

The US-Israeli plan to get humanitarian aid into Gaza, amid the use of starvation as a weapon of war, enables Israel to “force the ethnic cleansing of a huge part of Gaza’s population”, argues Matt Duss, the executive vice president of the Center for International Policy.

United States President Donald Trump visited the Middle East, which saw a shift in US policy on Yemen, Iran, and Syria.

Duss tells host Steve Clemons that the Democratic Party would be wise to learn from Trump’s foreign policy. “The Democrats have completely left the antiwar, pro-diplomacy, pro-peace lane open for Donald Trump to fill,” he says.

May 17 (UPI) — A federal appeals court reversed a lower court decision, allowing President Donald Trump to move ahead with a directive to end collective bargaining rights for thousands of federal workers.

“The Government is likely to prevail in its appeal of the district court’s preliminary injunction. To obtain a preliminary injunction, a plaintiff must demonstrate that it will suffer irreparable harm while the case is pending. The National Treasury Employees Union failed to establish irreparable harm,” the U.S. Court of Appeals For The District of Columbia wrote in its 2-1 ruling this week.

Trump in March issued an executive order directing several federal departments and agencies to cease collective bargaining.

Later that month, the National Treasury Employees Union filed a lawsuit in federal court, arguing the government’s move to direct its 150,000 employees to “cease participating in grievance procedures” was unlawful.

“The Union says it will suffer two irreparable harms. Neither qualifies,” Judges Karen Henderson and Justin Walker wrote in the court’s majority opinion.

Henderson was appointed by former president George H.W. Bush, while Walker was appointed by Trump during his first term.

The court rejected the National Treasury Employees Union’s argument that it would lose bargaining power “and suffer reputational harm that will deter present and future membership,” arguing the government put off any decertification until after all litigation is settled.

“The Union claims that a stay will ‘nullify the collective-bargaining rights of over one-hundred thousand NTEU-represented federal workers.’ But that ignores the Government’s self-imposed restrictions, so it misses the mark,” the court wrote.

“Second, the Union says it will suffer an irreparable financial injury from the loss of automatically withheld union dues. But such ‘financial injuries are rarely irreparable because they are presumptively remediable through monetary damages,'” the court wrote, pointing to the union’s ability to recover any potentially lost dues in future Federal Labor Relations Authority proceedings.

Trump’s executive order applies to more than 12 agencies, exempting them from any requirements to engage in collective bargaining with employees and unions.

The Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Departments of State, Defense, Homeland Security, Treasury, Veterans Affairs and Health and Human Services are all covered by the order.

“How can the Government argue that the district court injunction will cause irreparable injury when the Government itself voluntarily imposed that same constraint?” Judge Michelle Childs, who was appointed by former president Joe Biden, wrote in the dissenting opinion.

Actory calls on filmmakers to ‘keep telling the stories, keep expressing yourself and keep fighting to be who you are’.

Chilean-American actor Pedro Pascal has called on members of the film industry to “fight back” and keep expressing themselves amid what he appeared to describe as a political climate of fear in the United States.

“F*** the people that try to make you scared. And fight back. This is the perfect way to do so in telling stories. Don’t let them win,” said 50-year-old Pascal, who was at the Cannes film festival for the premiere of “Eddington”.

“Fear is the way that they win, for one. And so keep telling the stories and keep expressing yourself and keep fighting to be who you are,” he said.

“Eddington” stars Pascal as a small-town mayor campaigning against a down-on-his-luck sheriff played by Joaquin Phoenix in a New Mexico town where tensions are simmering over COVID-19 mask policies and the Black Lives Matter protests.

Pascal, known for his role in dystopian video-game adaptation “The Last of Us”, added that it was “far too intimidating” for him to address a question about US President Donald Trump’s immigration policy.

“It’s very scary for an actor participating in a movie to sort of speak to issues like this,” he said.

“I’m an immigrant. My parents are refugees from Chile. We fled a dictatorship, and I was privileged enough to grow up in the US after asylum in Denmark … I stand by those protections,” the 50-year-old told a news conference in Cannes.

Trump has launched a crackdown on irregular immigration and has also detained and moved to deport a number of legal permanent US residents, his policies triggering a rash of lawsuits and protests.

Trump has made himself one of the main talking points in Cannes this week after announcing on May 5 that he wanted 100 percent tariffs on movies “produced in foreign lands“.

Acting legend Robert de Niro, who accepted a Cannes lifetime achievement award on Tuesday, also urged an audience of A-list directors and actors to resist “America’s philistine president”.

May 17 (UPI) — A recent Walmart earnings report citing tariffs aa a potential reason for raising prices promoted President Donald Trump to tell the world’s largest retailer to “eat the tariffs.”

“Walmart should stop trying to blame tariffs as the reason for rising prices throughout the chain,” Trump said Saturday morning in a Truth Social post.

“Walmart made billions of dollars last year,” Trump said, adding that its earnings were “far more than expected.”

“Between Walmart and China, they should, as is said, ‘eat the tariffs,’ and not charge valued customers anything,” he said.

The president said he will be “watching, and so will your customers!!!”

Narrow retail margins that are less than those of other business sectors might make it impossible for Walmart to simply eat the cost of tariffs.

“We have always worked to keep our prices as low as possible, and we won’t stop,” Walmart said in a statement to CNBC. “We’ll keep prices as low as we can for as long as we can given the reality of small retail margins.”

Trump made his social media comment two days after Walmart President and Chief Executive Officer Doug McMillon told investors Trump’s tariff policies might require the retailer to raise prices on affected goods.

“We will do our best to keep our prices as low as possible, but given the magnitude of tariffs, even at the reduced levels announced this week, we aren’t able to absorb all the pressure,” Doug McMillon, Walmart president and chief executive officer, said during an earnings call on Thursday.

Walmart’s latest guidance and forward-looking statements affirm tariffs are among factors that could significantly impact its earnings throughout the rest of the year and possibly beyond.

“The company’s results may be materially affected by many factors, such as fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates, changes in global economic and geopolitical conditions, tariff and trade policies, customer demand and spending, inflation, interest rates, world events and various other factors,” Walmart’s earnings report says.

Rapidly changing costs are making it difficult for the retailer gauge the near-future of Walmart Chief Financial Officer John Rainey told CNBC on Thursday.

“We have not seen price increases at this magnitude in the speed in which they’re coming at us before,” Rainey said. “It makes for a challenging environment.”

The electronics and toys that Walmart sells mostly come from China, which so far is subject to a 30% tariff.

The retailer also sells goods from Central and South America, such as bananas, coffee and avocados, which also are subject to at least a 10% tariff.

Rainey told CNBC the retailer wants to keep its prices below its competitors’ prices for similar goods, which would require absorbing cost increases due to tariffs.

May 16 (UPI) — U.S. President Donald Trump has directed the firing of almost 600 employees with the publicly-funded Voice of America, representing about a third of the broadcaster’s staff.

“Today, in compliance with President Trump’s Executive Order titled, Continuing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy, dated March 14, 2025, the US Agency for Global Media initiated measures to eliminate the non-statutory components and functions to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law,” U.S. Agency for Global Media Senior Adviser Kari Lake said on the agency’s website late Thursday.

“This action will impact the agency’s workforce at USAGM, Voice of America, Office of Cuba Broadcasting, and all Grantees. Most USAGM staff affected by this action will be placed on paid-administrative leave beginning Saturday, March 15, 2025, and remain on leave until further notice.”

“Buckle up. There’s more to come,” Lake said in an email to the Washington Post.

The USAGM is the agency responsible for VOA, which provides non-partisan news content in countries across the world, including China, Iran, Russia and others with limited freedom of the press.

The bulk of Voice of America’s approximately 1,350 full-time employees were not affected by the latest executive order, which targets mostly contractors.

Lake confirmed 584 positions were affected.

VOA director Michael Abramowitz told staff he is “heartbroken,” The Post reported, citing an internal memo.

“Some of VOA’s most talented journalists have been [personal services contractors] – many of whom have escaped tyranny in their home countries to tell America’s story of freedom and democracy,” Abramowitz wrote in the memo.

Trump’s executive order aims to continue “the reduction in the elements of the Federal bureaucracy that the President has determined are unnecessary.”

The president has previously called the agency “anti-American” and accused it of broadcasting “propaganda.”

The news comes despite a federal judge in April ordering the Trump administration to restore funding and staffing to Voice of America and its affiliated news services. At the time, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth deemed the administration’s cuts to be unconstitutional.

Trump in mid-March signed an executive order to reduce the scope of the federal government, which targeted the USGM and VOA.

Earlier this month, the Justice Department announced a “phased return” of VOA staff following court rulings.

Lake in her statement said the agency would continue its international broadcast of U.S. news, but vowed once again to cut excessive spending.

“While at USAGM, I vow to fully implement President Trump’s executive orders in his mission to reduce the size and scope of the federal government,” Lake said in the statement, adding the reductions are within what is “statutorily required by law.”

“The US Agency for Global media will continue to deliver on all statutory programs that fall under the agency’s purview and shed everything that is not statutorily required. I fully support the President’s executive order. Waste, fraud, and abuse run rampant in this agency and American taxpayers shouldn’t have to fund it,” Lake wrote.

BEIRUT, Lebanon, May 16 (UPI) — U.S. President Donald Trump‘s unexpected approach to Syria has presented a significant opportunity for the country’s interim president, Ahmad Sharaa, to prove that he can overcome the enormous challenges he faces and lead the war-torn nation toward recovery and stabilization, political analysts and experts said.

Trump’s announcement of the cessation of U.S. sanctions, along with his meeting with Sharaa — a former jihadist who, until recently, was on the U.S. most-wanted list with a $10 million bounty on his head — marked a turning point and the beginning of a new chapter for Syria nearly six months after the fall of President Bashar al-Assad and his Baathist regime.

With Assad gone, the sanctions were increasingly seen as only prolonging the suffering of the Syrian people and worsening the already catastrophic humanitarian conditions.

Had the sanctions remained in place, Syria would have become a failed state, as it was just weeks away from financial collapse, according to Mouaz Mustafa of the Syrian Emergency Task Force. In an interview with PBS NewsHour, Mustafa warned that continued sanctions would have led to disastrous consequences for both the region and the world.

With layers of sanctions in place since 1979, the process of lifting them remains unclear, and experts say it will take time.

“There is a huge difference between deciding to lift sanctions and actually lifting them,” Nanar Hawach, a senior Syria analyst for the International Crisis Group, told UPI.

However, he said it would be “a game-changer” for the economy, giving the green light for the private sector and other stakeholders involved in Syria to step in and “be more bold.”

Since taking over after Assad’s ouster, Sharaa has repeatedly called for the lifting of U.S. and other international sanctions to allow his country to breathe again. He understands that without funding and financial support, there is little he can do to put Syria back on track.

Mona Yacoubian, director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that the continuation of sanctions was hindering the country’s ability to recover and move forward.

Yacoubian noted that removing the sanctions would open the way for Gulf countries in particular to “do more” and channel more resources toward Syria’s early recovery and stabilization, and eventually, reconstruction — provided it is done “transparently and in a responsible way.”

However, Syria’s problems will not be resolved simply by ending the sanctions.

Sharaa is facing “very significant issues,” including sectarian tensions, the need for transitional justice, and how to manage the more extreme elements of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, or HTS — the group he led before becoming president — as well as affiliated factions on which he continues to rely while trying to consolidate control.

“So how will he use this newfound breathing space and the anticipated resources to consolidate his personal power, or rather to put Syria on a more sustainable path toward stability and, ultimately, peace?” Yacoubian asked rhetorically.

She added that he will have to demonstrate a willingness to undertake complex processes related to transitional justice, inclusive governance, and national reconciliation.

According to Hawach, Trump has given Sharaa “the benefit of the doubt,” and the new leadership in Damascus will need to seize this opportunity to meet internal and external expectations.

“How willing are they to take bold, risky steps such as distancing themselves from their radical base and expanding to include a broader range of constituencies?” he asked. “Are they prepared to take courageous actions to rein in or address the presence of foreign fighters? Would they focus on other issues, such as building institutional capacity or strengthening military capabilities?”

Trump, who described Sharaa as an “attractive, tough guy,” urged him to join the Abraham Accords and normalize relations with Israel, expel foreign fighters from Syria, deport Palestinian militants, assist the U.S. in preventing an ISIS resurgence and take responsibility for ISIS detention centers in northeast Syria.

What Syrians want most is a more inclusive national dialogue and political process, the formation of a national army and measures to address the fears of minority groups.

Anas Joudeh, a political researcher and founder of the Nation Building Movement in Syria, said the first step would be for Sharaa to seriously engage with all of the country’s constituencies, restart the national dialogue, adopt a new constitution, and form a more inclusive government.

“We can’t expect things to be perfect right now,” Joudeh told UPI. “We will strongly support any move toward greater inclusivity, as the country is heading toward total economic and social collapse.”

He said the key to Syria’s successful transition is the formation of a national army, which poses a “big challenge” for Sharaa. This includes absorbing the armed factions, addressing the foreign fighters who still maintain control in several areas and convincing the Druze, Alawites and Kurds to lay down their weapons.

“But that would be very difficult if Sharaa keeps on [running the country] with the same mentality,” Joudeh said.

Sharaa will, therefore, need to address the concerns of the Druze, Alawites and Kurds, find solutions to mitigate feelings of existential threat, impose security and, ultimately, act not as a faction leader, but as the leader of the entire country, Hawach said.

“If they decide to make positive steps towards these communities, this is the perfect time to do so,” he added.

He explained that with the possibility of accessing much-needed funds, the country can recruit for the army, establish better command control and gain more leverage to deal with armed factions that are not yet fully under the new authorities’ control.

Makram Rabah, a political activist and history professor at the American University of Beirut, said Trump’s meeting with Sharaa will put more pressures on him to act as a political leader.

“Lifting the sanctions sent a message not only to Sharaa but also to the Druze, Kurds and Alawites: that there is political cover, a form of settlement, and a need to work together,” Rabah told UPI. “However, this is far from easy.”

United States House Republicans’ “big, beautiful bill”, a wide-ranging tax and spending legislation, is at a crucial moment.

The nearly 400-page legislation proposes sweeping changes which include extending the 2017 tax cuts, slashing taxes for businesses and individuals, and enacting deep cuts to social programmes like Medicaid and SNAP.

While Republicans tout the bill as a boon for economic growth and middle-class relief, nonpartisan analysts warn it could add trillions to the national debt and strip millions of Americans of medical and food assistance.

The bill will be voted on by the House Budget Committee today and, if passed, will be voted on the floor next week.

The most substantive part of the bill is an extension of the 2017 tax cuts. The tax bill would add at least an additional $2.5 trillion to the national deficit over the next 10 years and decrease federal tax revenue by roughly $4 trillion by 2034.

Passing the legislation will also raise the debt ceiling, which sets the amount of money the government can borrow to pay for existing expenditures, by $4 trillion, a sticking point for hardline Republicans who want deeper cuts.

Here are some of the key measures in the proposed bill in its current form.

Changes for households

The bill increases standard deductions for all Americans. Individual deductions will increase by $1,000, $1,500 for heads of households, and $2,000 for married couples.

The bill extends the child tax credit of $2,000, which would otherwise have ended with the expiration of the 2017 tax cuts at year’s end.

It bumps up the child tax credit by $500 per child for this tax year and runs through the end of 2028. It also includes a $1,000 savings account for children born between December 31, 2024 and January 1, 2029. The legislation would also allow families to annually contribute $5,000 tax-free.

There is a new tax deduction for Americans 65 and older. The new bill would give a $4,000 annual deduction starting this year for people making a gross income of $75,000 for a single person and $150,000 for a married couple. If passed, the rule would take effect for the current tax year and run until the end of 2028.

“It will just make tax paying more complicated and more uncertain when a lot of these things ultimately expire,” Adam Michel, director of tax policy studies at the right-leaning Cato Institute, told Al Jazeera.

Another provision in the bill modifies state and local tax (SALT) deductions. It allows filers to be able to write off some of what they paid in local and state taxes from their federal filings.

Under the 2017 tax act, that was capped at $10,000, but the new legislation would raise that to $30,000. Some Republicans, particularly those in states with higher taxes like New York and California, have been pushing to raise the cap or abolish it altogether. However, they have faced fiscal hawks and those who see the increases as relief for those already wealthy.

The bill includes an increased benefit for small businesses that allows them to deduct 23 percent of their qualified business income from their taxes, up from the current 20 percent.

There is also a call for no taxes on overtime pay for select individuals. It would not apply to people who are non-citizens, those who are considered “highly compensated employees,” and those who earn a tipped wage.

The bill, however, also eliminates taxes on tips, a critical campaign promise by both Donald Trump and his Democratic rival Kamala Harris. The bill would allow people who work in sectors like food service, as well as hair care, nail care, aesthetics, and body and spa treatments, to specifically deduct the amount of tipped income they receive.

At the federal level, employers will still not be required to pay tipped workers more than the subminimum wage of $2.13 hourly. The intention is that workers will be able to make up the difference in tipping the receipt from customers.

Cuts to the social safety net

The legislation calls to make $880bn in cuts to key government programmes with a focus mostly on Medicaid and food stamps.

The CBO found that more than 10 million people could lose Medicaid access and 7.6 million could lose access to health insurance completely by 2034 under the current plan.

Even far-right Republicans have called out the Medicaid cuts. In an op-ed in The New York Times this week, Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri said the cuts are “morally wrong and politically suicidal”.

According to a new report from One Fair Wage shared with Al Jazeera, tipped workers could be hit especially hard, as 1.2 million restaurant and tipped workers could lose access to Medicaid.

“A no tax on tips proposal, which is like a minuscule percentage of their income and doesn’t affect two-thirds of tips workers because they don’t earn enough to pay federal income tax, is just nowhere near enough to compensate for the fact that we’re going to have millions of these workers lose the ability to take care of themselves, in some cases go into medical debt, in many cases just not take care of themselves,” Saru Jayaraman, president of One Fair Wage, an advocacy group for restaurant workers, told Al Jazeera.

The bill also introduces work requirements to receive benefits, saying that recipients must prove they work, volunteer or are enrolled in school for at least 80 hours each month.

At the same time, the bill also shortens the open enrolment period by a month for the Affordable Care Act (ACA), otherwise known as Obamacare. This means people who have employer-funded healthcare and lose their job might lose eligibility to buy a private plan on the healthcare exchange.

“It’s taking folks like 11 to 12 weeks to find a new job. The worse the labour market gets, that number will tick up. If you’re unemployed for three months, you get kicked off Medicaid,” Liz Pancotti, managing director of policy and advocacy at the Groundwork Collective, told Al Jazeera.

“Then, if you try to go buy a plan on the ACA marketplace, you are no longer eligible for subsidies … which I think is really cruel.”

Other major proposed cuts will hit programmes like Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programme or SNAP, which helps 42 million low-income individuals afford groceries and comes at a time when food costs are still 2 percent higher than a year ago. The CBO found that 3 million people could lose SNAP access under the new plan.

The bill would also force states to take up more responsibility in funding the programmes. States would be required to cover 75 percent of the administrative costs, and all states would have to pay at least 5 percent of the benefits — 28 states would need to pay 25 percent.

“States are now going to be on the hook for billions of dollars in funding for these two vital programmes. They have a tough choice. One is, do they cut funding from others like K-12 education, roads, veteran services, etc, to cover this gap, or do they raise taxes so that they can raise more revenue to cover this gap,” Pancotti added.

Under the current law, the federal government is solely responsible for shouldering the cost of benefits. The proposed cuts would save $300bn for the federal government but hit state budgets hard.

Bill fuels Trump administration priorities

The bill would also cut the $7,500 tax credit for new electric vehicle purchases and $4,000 for a used EV, a move which could hurt several major US automakers that are already reeling from the administration’s tariffs on automobiles.

General Motors pumped billions into domestic EV production in the last year, which has included a $900m investment to retrofit an existing plant to build electric vehicles in Michigan and alongside Samsung, the carmaker invested $3.5bn in EV battery manufacturing in the US.

In February, Ford CEO Jim Farley said that revoking the EV tax credit could put factory jobs on the chopping block. The carmaker invested in three EV battery plants in Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee. The federal government under the administration of former President Joe Biden paid out more than $2bn in EV tax credits in 2024.

The proposed legislation would also give the Trump administration authority to revoke the tax exempt status of nonprofit organisations that it deems as a “terrorist supporting organisation”. It would give the secretary of the treasury the ability to accuse any nonprofit of supporting “terrorism”, revoke their tax exempt status without allowing them due process to prove otherwise, which has raised serious concerns amongst critics.

“This measure’s real intent lurks behind its hyperbolic and unsubstantiated anti-terrorist rhetoric: It would allow the Treasury Department to explicitly target, harass and investigate thousands of U.S. organizations that make up civil society, including nonprofit newsrooms,” Jenna Ruddock, advocacy director of Free Press Action, said in a statement.

“The bill’s language lacks any meaningful safeguards against abuse. Instead it puts the burden of proof on organizations rather than on the government. It’s not hard to imagine how the Trump administration would use it to exact revenge on groups that have raised questions about or simply angered the president and other officials in his orbit.”

The bill would introduce new taxes on colleges, including a varying tax rate based on the size of a university’s endowment per student with the highest at 14 percent for universities with a per student endowment of more than $1.25m but less than $2m and 21 percent for those of $2m or more.

This comes amid the Trump administration’s increased tensions with higher education. In the last week, the Trump administration pulled $450m in grants to Harvard on top of the $2.2bn it pulled in April — a move which will hinder research into cancer and heart disease, among other areas. Harvard has an endowment of $53.2bn, making it one of the richest schools in the country.

The legislation would also increase funding for a border wall between the US and Mexico, which the administration has argued will help curb undocumented immigration. However, there is no evidence that such a wall has deterred border crossings.

A 2018 analysis from Stanford University found that a border wall would only curb migration by 0.6 percent, yet the bill would give more than $50bn to finish the border wall and maritime crossings. The bill would also provide $45bn for building and maintaining detention facilities and another $14bn for transport.

May 16 (UPI) — President Donald Trump‘s legislative agenda megabill failed to advance after a band of far-right Republicans objected to it during a meeting of the House Budget Committee on Friday.

House Freedom Caucus members — Reps. Andrew Clyde, Josh Brecheen, Ralph Norman and Chip Roy — were joined by Rep. Lloyd Smucker in voting against letting the bill out of committee.

“We are writing checks we cannot cash, and our children are going to pay the price. I am a no on this bill unless serious reforms are made today, tomorrow, Sunday,” Roy said in the committee meeting. “Something needs to change, or you’re not going to get my support.”

Roy said on social media that the critics of the bill were “making progress” in negotiating it, but the vote was called “and the problems were not resolved.”

Norman similarly aired his issues with the bill on Friday on social media. “Why rush the process when we should be working overtime to get it right?” he said.

Clyde affirmed on social media that he “fully” supports Trump’s agenda but said the bill did not go far enough in addressing alleged waste, fraud and abuse in Medicaid, among other grievances.

Committee chair Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, adjourned the meeting after the vote was read and said they would not meet again until after the weekend.

Rep. Glenn Grothman, R-Wis., predicted in comments to NBC News that the bill would eventually pass after negotiations. “It has to pass,” he said.

Smucker, who initially voted for the bill before changing his vote, also said he hopes the bill can pass the committee by Monday.

Hours before the vote, Trump hit out at his critics on his Truth Social platform, saying that the “grandstanders” must unite behind his agenda.

“Not only does it cut taxes for all Americans, but it will kick millions of illegal aliens off of Medicaid to protect it for those who are the ones in real need,” Trump said.

“The country will suffer greatly without this Legislation, with their taxes going up 65%. It will be blamed on the Democrats, but that doesn’t help our voters. We don’t need ‘grandstanders’ in the Republican Party.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson has plans to put the legislation on the floor for a vote before Memorial Day.

Roy said Thursday in a post to X that “the House proposal fails to meet the moment,” and that “it does not meaningfully change spending,” and then added that he feels “many of the decent provisions and cuts, don’t begin until 2029 and beyond. That is swamp accounting to dodge real savings.”

Currently, the bill’s work requirements for Medicaid recipients without disabilities and children would not launch until 2029.

Aside from Roy and Norman, a contingent of GOP members from New York have made it clear they won’t vote for the bill unless it addresses state and local taxes, or SALT.

The bill as is raises the current $10,000 cap on SALT that can be written off on federal tax returns to $30,000, but the Empire State Republicans want it to be even higher.

“My Republican colleagues need to remember that maintaining the majority means they have to work together with swing seats like mine, where SALT is a priority. It’s time to negotiate; they need to pass the SALT, or I’m voting no,” Rep. Mike Lawler, R- N.Y. announced Wednesday on social media.

Fellow GOP and New York Congressman Nick LaLota stated on X Thursday that “$250K might be rich in Missouri,” but “not on Long Island,” and that “A $30K SALT cap doesn’t cut it. Before 2017, SALT was unlimited. We proposed $62K/$124K caps to fully protect 98% of my district.”

“I want to say yes to the One Big Beautiful Bill, but not without a real SALT fix,” LaLota said.

President Donald Trump responded to the impending showdown Friday via Truth Social, where he insisted “Republicans must unite behind, ‘The One, Big Beautiful Bill,'”

“We don’t need ‘grandstanders in the Republican Party. Stop talking and get it done!” Trump wrote.

The bill if passed would both extend the life of tax cuts set during Trump’s first term and enact up to $1.5 trillion in new tax breaks, with an increase of federal deficit by $1.5 trillion as Trump seeks to spend as much as $175 billion on border security and immigration enforcement, as well as an additional $150 billion for military spending.

The legislation would also increase fossil fuel production and the mining of public lands. To offset the spending, there will be $1.5 trillion in cuts to spending of safety-net programs.

“We have a duty to know the true cost of this legislation before advancing it,” Brecheen said. “If we are to operate in truth, we must have true numbers, even if that means taking some more time to obtain that truth.”

The United States Supreme Court has granted an emergency petition from a group of migrants in Texas, barring the use of an 18th-century wartime law to expedite their removals.

Friday’s unsigned decision (PDF) is yet another blow to the administration of President Donald Trump, who has sought to use the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to swiftly deport undocumented immigrants out of the US.

Only two conservative justices dissented: Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

While the high court has yet to rule on the merits of Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act, it did issue “injunctive relief” to Venezuelan migrants faced with expulsion under the centuries-old law.

“We have long held that ‘no person shall be’ removed from the United States ‘without opportunity, at some time, to be heard’,” the court majority wrote in its ruling.

It reaffirmed a previous opinion that migrants in the US are entitled to due process – in other words, they are entitled to a fair hearing in the judicial system – before their deportation.

Friday’s case was brought by two unnamed migrants from Venezuela, identified only by initials. They are being held in a detention centre in north Texas as they face deportation.

The Trump administration has accused them, and others from Venezuela, of being members of the Tren de Aragua gang. It has further sought to paint undocumented migration into the US as an “invasion” and link Tren de Aragua’s activities in the US to the Venezuelan government, an assertion that a recently declassified intelligence memo disputes.

That, the Trump administration has argued, justifies its use of the Alien Enemies Act, which has only been used three times prior in US history – and only during periods of war.

But Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act has spurred a legal backlash, with several US district courts hearing petitions from migrants fearing expulsion under the law.

Multiple judges have barred the law’s use for expedited removals. But one judge in Pennsylvania ruled the Trump administration could deploy the law – provided it offer appropriate notice to those facing deportation. She suggested 21 days.

The Supreme Court on Friday did not weigh in on whether Trump’s use of the law was merited. Instead, its ruling – 24 pages in total, including a dissent – hewed closely to the issue of whether the Venezuelans in question deserved relief from their imminent deportation under the law.

The majority of the nine-justice bench noted that “evidence” it had seen in the case suggested “the Government had in fact taken steps on the afternoon of April 18” to invoke the Alien Enemies Act, even transporting the migrants “from their detention facility to an airport and later returning them”.

The justices asserted that they had a right to weigh in on the case, in order to prevent “irreparable harm” to the migrants and assert their jurisdiction in the case. Otherwise, they pointed out a deportation could put the migrants beyond their reach.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh went a step further in a separate opinion, calling on the Supreme Court to issue a final and binding ruling in the matter, rather than simply grant this one petition.

“The circumstances call for a prompt and final resolution, which likely can be provided only by this Court,” he said, agreeing with the majority’s decision.

Thomas and Alito, in their dissent, argued the Supreme Court had not afforded enough time to a lower court to rule on the emergency petition.

In the aftermath of the ruling, Trump lashed out on Truth Social, portraying the Supreme Court’s majority as overly lax towards migrants.

“THE SUPREME COURT WON’T ALLOW US TO GET CRIMINALS OUT OF OUR COUNTRY!” Trump wrote in the first of two consecutive posts.

In the second, he called Friday’s decision the mark of a “bad and dangerous day in America”. He complained that affirming the right to due process would result in “a long, protracted, and expensive Legal Process, one that will take, possibly, many years for each person”.

He also argued that the high court was preventing him from exercising his executive authority.

“The Supreme Court of the United States is not allowing me to do what I was elected to do,” he wrote, imagining a circumstance where extended deportation hearings would lead to “bedlam” in the US.

His administration has long accused the courts of interference in his agenda. But critics have warned that Trump’s actions – particularly, alleged efforts to ignore court orders – are eroding the US’s constitutional system of checks and balances.

In a statement after the ruling, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) praised the court’s decision as a bulwark against human rights abuses.

“The court’s decision to stay removals is a powerful rebuke to the government’s attempt to hurry people away to a Gulag-type prison in El Salvador,” said Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project.

“The use of a wartime authority during peacetime, without even affording due process, raises issues of profound importance.”

The Supreme Court currently boasts a conservative supermajority, with six right-leaning judges and three left-leaning ones.

Three among them were appointed by Trump himself. Those three sided with the majority.

May 16 (UPI) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday blocked the administration of President Donald Trump from using the rare wartime Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan detainees accused of being members of violent gangs.

The Supreme Court, in its decision, also rebuked judges from a U.S. District Court in North Texas for waiting too long to act on urgent requests related to the impending deportations.

The decision, which sent the case for deliberation back to the Fifth Circuit court, effectively blocks any removals under the Alien Enemies Act until the case can be properly reviewed.

The case is rooted in an April 17 request from two Venezuelan detainees for a temporary restraining order to stop their removal from the United States, which the district court denied that evening.

Later that night, the two detainees were given notice of their imminent removal, leading their lawyers to file a second, emergency request for a temporary restraining order to halt their deportation just after midnight.

“The named applicants, along with putative class members, are entitled to constitutionally adequate notice prior to any removal, in order to pursue appropriate relief,” the Supreme Court wrote in its latest ruling.

The lawyers asked the court to rule on the second request or hold a status conference by 1:30 p.m. The district court failed to rule on the request or hold a status conference that day, with their inaction becoming central to the Supreme Court’s rebuke.

“A district court’s inaction in the face of extreme urgency and a high risk of ‘serious, perhaps irreparable,’ consequences may have the effect of refusing an injunction,” the Supreme Court ruled.

By 3 p.m. on April 18, the lawyers for the detainees appealed to the Fifth Circuit, claiming that the district court’s inaction amounted to a constructive denial — which is when a court does not officially decline a request but acts, or fails to act, in a way that is effectively a denial.

The Supreme Court previously ruled in this case, ordering an emergency injunction that evening to stop the deportations before midnight. That ruling was a procedural hold, not a final ruling, and did not weigh in on the legality of the deportations.

In the days following the emergency injunction, the Fifth Circuit dismissed the appeal, reasoning that the detainees had not given the district court enough time to respond before escalating the case.

This prompted the process for the case to return before the Supreme Court as the detainees asked the high court to treat their emergency application as a formal petition for the court to hear the case, review the lower court’s rulings and to settle the constitutional questions raised by their deportations.

The Supreme Court has vacated the Fifth Circuit court’s dismissal and sent it back to the lower court for a proper legal review, preventing the government from further deportations until the case can be properly decided.

The high court clarified that, as on April 19, its ruling does not address the underlying merits of each side regarding removals under the Alien Enemies Act.

“We recognize the significance of the Government’s national security interests as well as the necessity that such interests be pursued in a manner consistent with the Constitution,” the Supreme Court wrote. “In light of the foregoing, lower courts should address AEA cases expeditiously.”

Justice Samuel Alito dissented, joined by Clarence Thomas, arguing that the Supreme Court never had the legal authority to step in because there was no valid appeal since the district court never actually denied the temporary restraining order request.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement has accused a Mexican woman of furnishing a cartel with grenades and other weapons.

The United States has revealed the first federal charges against a foreign national for providing material support to one of the criminal groups that President Donald Trump has designated a “foreign terrorist organisation”.

On Friday, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) issued a statement identifying the suspect as 39-year-old Maria Del Rosario Navarro-Sanchez of Mexico.

An unsealed indictment accused Navarro-Sanchez of furnishing the Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generacion (CJNG), a Mexican drug cartel, with grenades and helping it smuggle migrants, firearms, money and drugs.

“Cartels like CJNG are terrorist groups that wreak havoc in American communities and are responsible for countless lives lost in the United States, Mexico and elsewhere,” US Attorney General Pam Bondi said in the statement.

“This announcement demonstrates the Justice Department’s unwavering commitment to securing our borders and protecting Americans through effective prosecution.”

The charges stem from a decision early in Trump’s second term in office to apply “terrorism” designations to foreign criminal organisations, including gangs and drug cartels.

On his first day back in office, on January 20, Trump signed an executive order declaring that “international cartels constitute a national-security threat beyond that posed by traditional organized crime”. He directed his officials to begin preparations for implementing the “terrorism” designations.

By February 19, the Federal Register in the US listed eight Latin American criminal groups as “foreign terrorist organisations”, among them the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua and the Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13).

Mexico’s Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generacion was also among that initial group of designated organisations.

Since then, the Trump administration has broadened its scope, adding more Latin American groups to the list. On May 2, for instance, two Haitian gangs – Viv Ansanm and Gran Grif – joined the US’s list of foreign terrorist organisations.

These designations are a departure from the usual use of the “foreign terrorist” label, often reserved for organisations that seek specific political aims through their violence.

Critics, however, warn that this application could have unintended consequences, particularly for civilians in vulnerable situations. The “foreign terrorist designation” makes it a crime for anyone to offer material support to a given group, but criminal gangs often extort civilians for money and services as part of their fundraising activities.

“You could accuse anyone – from a migrant who pays a smuggler to a Mexican business that is forced to pay a ‘protection fee’ – of offering material or financial support to a terrorist organisation,” Will Freeman, a fellow for Latin America studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, told Al Jazeera journalist Brian Osgood earlier this year.

In the case unsealed on Friday, it was revealed that Navarro-Sanchez was arrested on May 4. She had two co-defendants, also Mexican citizens, who likewise faced charges of firearms trafficking and other crimes.

The Mexican government had previously confirmed Navarro-Sanchez’s arrest. A statement ICE released to the media showed multiple firearms and packages of meth and fentanyl allegedly linked to the case.

It also included a photo of a golden AR-15 gun known as “El Dorado” that was reportedly “recovered from Navarro-Sanchez’s possession during her arrest in Mexico”.

“Supplying grenades to a designated terrorist organisation – while trafficking firearms, narcotics, and human beings – is not just criminal,” said ICE’s acting Director Todd Lyons. “It’s a direct assault on the security of the United States.”

Moody’s cited rising debt, saying US had repeatedly failed to end the trend of large annual fiscal deficits and interest.

Moody’s Ratings has stripped the United States government of its top credit rating, citing successive governments’ failure to stop a rising tide of debt.

On Friday, Moody’s lowered the rating from a gold-standard Aaa to Aa1. “Successive US administrations and Congress have failed to agree on measures to reverse the trend of large annual fiscal deficits and growing interest costs,” it said as it changed its outlook on the US to “stable” from “negative”.

But, it added, the US “retains exceptional credit strengths such as the size, resilience and dynamism of its economy and the role of the US dollar as global reserve currency.”

Moody’s is the last of the three major rating agencies to lower the federal government’s credit rating. Standard & Poor’s downgraded federal debt in 2011, and Fitch Ratings followed in 2023.

In a statement, Moody’s said: “We expect federal deficits to widen, reaching nearly 9 percent of [the US economy] by 2035, up from 6.4 percent in 2024, driven mainly by increased interest payments on debt, rising entitlement spending, and relatively low revenue generation.’’

Extending President Donald Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, a priority of the Republican-controlled Congress, Moody’s said, would add $4 trillion over the next decade to the federal primary deficit, which does not include interest payments.

The White House adopted an aggressive tone towards Moody’s after the ratings agency downgraded the US credit rating.

White House communications director Steven Cheung reacted to the downgrade via a social media post, singling out Moody’s economist, Mark Zandi, for criticism. He called Zandi a political opponent of Trump.

“Nobody takes his ‘analysis’ seriously. He has been proven wrong time and time again,” Cheung said.

A gridlocked political system has been unable to tackle the huge deficits accumulated by the US. Republicans reject tax increases, and Democrats are reluctant to cut spending.

On Friday, House Republicans failed to push a big package of tax breaks and spending cuts through the Budget Committee. A small group of hard-right Republican lawmakers, insisting on steeper cuts to Medicaid and President Joe Biden’s green energy tax breaks, joined all Democrats in opposing it, a rare political setback for the Republican president.