World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 200 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      In California’s deep-red north, voters startled by pace of cuts – but they’re still backing Trump

      by

      Donald Trump’s administration has sought to remake the federal government at a breakneck pace. In far northern California – where he has strong support – people have backed those efforts. But even here, the speed and scale of the president’s agenda has been cause for concern.Officials in Shasta county, a region of 180,000 perhaps best known in recent years for its turbulent far-right politics, recently voted unanimously to send a letter to the federal government expressing concern about how layoffs could affect the nearby Whiskeytown national recreation area, which brings as much as $80m to the local economy each year.“The board urges the administration to reconsider layoffs impacting the National Park Service,” the letter states. “National parks, recreation areas, lakes, and mountainous regions throughout this great nation may be adversely impacted if not adequately protected and maintained for all to enjoy, both in the immediate future, and for years to come.”In March, about 150 people took to the streets in Redding, the Shasta county seat, to protest aggainst proposed cuts to the Department of Veterans Affairs. A month later more than 1,000 people in the area gathered to demonstrate against the administration’s policies.Amid reports about possible reductions to Medicaid, the head of the area’s largest healthcare provider warned such action could have “crippling” impacts in a county where the local Medicaid provider serves nearly a third of the population. A bipartisan group of state lawmakers, including the region’s Republican representatives, signed a letter in late April urging Congress to protect Head Start, the federally funded education program.While California remains a Democratic stronghold, its less densely populated interior swings decidedly more conservative, with deep red enclaves in the state’s far north that have been particularly supportive of Trump.In Shasta county, where the president visited during his 2016 campaign, 67% of voters voted for Trump in November. Nearby counties, including Tehama, Lassen and Modoc, backed Trump at even greater levels.Support for Trump’s agenda has remained strong among Republicans in California. While 68% of California voters reported they disapprove of Trump’s performance and just 30% approve, 75% of Republicans say they approve, according to a new Berkeley IGS poll. The poll also found that 69% of California Republicans think the country is now headed in the right direction, a major shift from last year when 93% believed it was headed in the wrong direction.That’s the case, too, in rural California, where many voters said they backed the Trump administration’s policies, including tariffs against other countries, a smaller federal government, and, they hoped, reduced prices and a stronger economy.But the unease in an area where the president is still deeply popular highlights the potential effects the cuts pose to the region – particularly its rural communities – that is more reliant on federal support on everything from infrastructure to emergency preparedness to healthcare and childcare.“These cuts may, in fact, hurt rural communities harder because they just don’t have their tax bases,” said Lisa Pruitt, a rural law expert at the University of California, Davis. “Their bandwidth for providing all sorts of services is just much weaker to begin with, and that makes them more reliant on federal monies.”For some in this part of California the outcomes, and rapid pace at which the administration has moved, have been startling.View image in fullscreenIt was what Morgan Akin, a Shasta county resident and US marine veteran who joined the March protest against the VA cuts, expected would happen when Trump took office.“They’re predicting 80,000 cuts on the VA. That’s going to have an effect on the veterans throughout the country,” said Akin. “All these federal employees have just been dumped.”He added: “It’s been a shock, and I think that’s what’s disrupting for most people.”Bruce Ross, a Shasta county Republican, acknowledged the difficulties of seeing layoffs, but said he had been pleased with the direction of the administration.“Everybody who lives up in north-eastern California knows folks who work for the Forest Service, or for federal agencies, and it’s tough for them. I think on a human level, that’s real,” Ross said. But, he added, he had seen a willingness on the part of the administration to listen when local officials have pushed back against proposed cuts, and the practical changes had ultimately, so far, been less severe than they initially seemed.“There’s been a lot of drama about it. But I think the actual results have shown that the administration is listening to people and saying, OK, this is important. We’re gonna take it back.”Congressman Doug LaMalfa, a Republican and staunch Trump supporter who represents a large swath of northern California’s interior, has acknowledged that some of his constituents, and Republicans broadly, are concerned, but echoed Ross’s sentiments. “But they’re listening to us. I got in a room with Elon [Musk] and his right-hand man. They’re understanding us now, and they’re going to look at it more through that lens, and they’ll certainly listen to us,’ he told the Chico Enterprise-Record in March.In that interview, he pushed back against talk of broad layoffs and cuts to key programs.“There is no social security cuts. There is no cuts to the VA system; the employee stuff, we’ve still got more work to do with that.”Ross, who is also the secretary for the Shasta county Republican central committee, admitted there would probaly be pain as Trump enacts his agenda, but argued that was necessary to tackle the federal deficit.“There’s a $2tn annual deficit with the federal government in Washington in a time of peace and a fairly strong economy,” he said. “How do you ever go about trying to balance that without being somewhat aggressive about actually cutting spending? It’s never going to be easy to do.”Steve Barkley, a 74-year-old who lives in northern California’s Sierra foothills, said he felt confident in the president’s agenda, and wasn’t worried about any cuts to Medicare or social security.“He’s the first candidate that was really saying the things that I wanted to hear, and promised to do the things that I want done, and he’s keeping his promises,” Barkley said, adding that he believed Trump’s recent actions ensure the longevity of those programs and boost the economy.“I’m happy. I don’t expect anything to get done right away. It’s going to take time.”Ross is hopeful that even with some short-term pain, Trump’s policies will ultimately improve the region. He pointed to the area’s recent history of massive destructive and deadly wildfires and the lack of land management in federal forests that he believes has contributed to such blazes. He would like to see the return of the timber industry, which was historically a major employer in the area, and believes that could be possible under the new administration.“I think that’s going to be good for northern California. It’s not just about money – it’s about what is their direction, and what are their goals? And just bluntly, they’re on our side,” he said.“And again, look at the federal deficits and explain how that’s sustainable, and explain how that’s going to change in a way that doesn’t cause some dissension. It’s hard on any level. But I think long-term, it’s what the country needs.” More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      James Comey investigated over seashell photo claimed to be ‘threat’ against Trump

      by

      A photo of seashells posted on Instagram by the former FBI director James Comey is now being investigated by the US Secret Service, after the US homeland security secretary Kristi Noem said it constituted a “threat” against Donald Trump.On Thursday, Comey posted a photo of seashells forming the message “8647”, with a caption that read: “Cool shell formation on my beach walk.”Trump’s supporters have interpreted the message as an endorsement of violence against Trump – the 47th president. There is more debate around the use of 86, a slang term often used in restaurants to mean getting rid of or throwing something out, and which, according to Merriam-Webster, has been used more recently, albeit sparingly, to mean “to kill”.Comey later took down his post, saying in a statement that he was unaware of the seashells’ potential meaning and saying that he does not condone violence of any kind.“I posted earlier a picture of some shells I saw today on a beach walk, which I assumed were a political message,” Comey said in a statement. “I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence. It never occurred to me, but I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down.”A spokesperson for the Secret Service confirmed the agency was “aware of the incident” and said it would “vigorously investigate” any potential threat, but did not offer further details.The post ignited a firestorm on the right, with Trump loyalists accusing the former FBI director of calling for the president’s assassination. Trump survived an attempt on his life at a campaign event in Pennsylvania last year.“Disgraced former FBI director James Comey just called for the assassination of POTUS Trump,” Noem wrote on X. “DHS and Secret Service is investigating this threat and will respond appropriately.”Comey and Trump have a deeply antagonistic relationship that stretches back to the early days of the first Trump administration when, according to Comey, Trump sought to secure a pledge of loyalty from the then FBI director, who refused.In a move that shocked Washington, Trump dismissed Comey, who was leading the criminal investigation into Russian meddling in the US election. Comey later wrote a memoir that recounted the episode, prompting Trump to declare him an “untruthful slime ball”.Comey has remained a Maga world bête noire, drawing rightwing ire whenever he steps into the political fray.Allies of the president were swift to condemn Comey on Thursday. “We are aware of the recent social media post by former FBI director James Comey, directed at President Trump,” Kash Patel, the FBI director, wrote on X, adding: “We, the FBI, will provide all necessary support.”Taylor Budowich, the White House deputy chief of staff, also responded by calling the photo “deeply concerning” and accused Comey of putting out “what can clearly be interpreted as ‘a hit’ on the sitting President of the United States”.Tennessee Congressman Tim Burchett, a staunch Trump supporter, called for Comey to be jailed. “Arrest Comey,” he wrote on X. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump announces more than $200bn of deals between US and UAE

      by

      Donald Trump has announced deals totaling more than $200bn between the United States and the United Arab Emirates, including a $14.5bn commitment among Boeing, GE Aerospace and Etihad Airways, as he pledged to strengthen ties between the US and the Gulf state during a multiday trip to the Middle East.The White House said on Thursday that Boeing and GE had received a commitment from Etihad Airways to invest $14.5bn to buy 28 US-made Boeing 787 and 777X aircraft powered by GE engines.“With the inclusion of the next-generation 777X in its fleet plan, the investment deepens the longstanding commercial aviation partnership between the UAE and the United States, fueling American manufacturing, driving exports,” the White House said.Antonoaldo Neves, the CEO of Etihad, said last month that the airline planned to add 20 to 22 new planes to its fleet of roughly 100 aircraft this year, as it aims to expand to more than 170 planes by 2030 and boost Abu Dhabi’s economic diversification strategy.Etihad, which is owned by Abu Dhabi’s $225bn wealth fund ADQ, has been through a multiyear restructuring and management shake-up, but has expanded under Neves.He said that 10 of the new aircraft this year would be Airbus A321LRs, which the carrier launched on Monday and will start operating in August. The remainder include six Airbus A350s and four Boeing 787s.The news follows a Wednesday announcement that Boeing had landed its largest-ever deal for wide-body airplanes, after securing an order for $96bn worth of Boeing jets from Qatar.The deal-making comes as the US president nears the ends of his multiday tour in the Middle East. Controversy has dogged the visit after the president announced earlier this week that he planned to accept a $400m luxury jumbo jet from the government of Qatar, raising numerous ethical concerns.Trump has since doubled down on his plans to accept the airplane as the new Air Force One, and eventually transfer it to his presidential library. “We’re the United States of America. I believe we should have the most impressive plane,” he said on Wednesday. More

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Judge dismisses trespassing charges against immigrants crossing US-Mexico border

      by

      A federal judge in New Mexico on Thursday dismissed trespassing charges against dozens of immigrants caught in a new military zone on the US-Mexico border, marking a setback for Trump administration efforts to raise penalties for unlawful crossings into the US.Chief US magistrate judge Gregory Wormuth began filing the dismissals late on Wednesday, ruling that immigrants did not know they were entering the military zone in New Mexico and therefore could not be charged, according to court documents and a defense attorney.Assistant federal public defender Amanda Skinner said Wormuth dismissed trespassing charges against all immigrants who made initial court appearances on Thursday. The immigrants still face charges accusing them of crossing the border illegally.“Judge Wormuth found no probable cause,” Skinner said in an email.New Mexico US attorney Ryan Ellison, who filed the first trespassing charges against migrants on 28 April, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The so-called New Mexico national defense area was established in April along 180 miles (290km) of the border, and US army troops were authorized to detain immigrants entering the area from Mexico.A second buffer zone was set up in Texas this month. Defense secretary Pete Hegseth said in a social media post the military would continue to expand the zones to gain “100% operational control” of the border.US attorneys charged over 100 immigrants with crossing the border illegally and trespassing in the military zones in New Mexico and Texas. Potential combined penalties were up to 10 years imprisonment, according to Hegseth.But Wormuth pushed back against the charges for the immigrants in New Mexico, ordering Ellison on 1 May to show proof they were aware they entered the military zone unlawfully.Defense attorneys argued warning signs in the area were inadequate to inform immigrants they were committing a crime, a position Wormuth agreed with.“The criminal complaint fails to establish probable cause to believe the defendant knew he/she was entering” the military zone, Wormuth wrote in his orders dismissing charges.The Department of Defense did not immediately respond to Reuters’ request for comment. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans say they want more American babies – but which kind?

      by

      Some of the children were too young to stand on their own. Instead, they sat on their parents’ knees or in their parents’ arms, waving American flags. Many of them seemed confused about what, exactly, was even happening.But these kids were in the midst of making history: their families were among the first to take advantage of Donald Trump’s February executive order granting white South Africans refugee status in the United States, on the grounds that Afrikaner landowners – who make up just 7% of South Africa’s population yet, decades after the end of apartheid, control about half of its land – are facing persecution. While the doors to the US refugee program have been slammed shut to virtually everyone else, these Afrikaners showed up in the US earlier this week, their refugee status promising a path to US citizenship.Days later, the Trump administration took a far narrower view of who deserves access to the American polity. On Thursday morning, a lawyer for the Trump administration argued in front of the US supreme court that the 14th amendment does not guarantee citizenship to the American-born children of “illegal aliens” – a view contradicted by more than a century of legal precedent.This split screen raises a vital question: is the Trump administration really interested in helping children and families flourish – or only the “right” families?Over the last several months, the Trump administration’s policies on immigration, families, and children have been pockmarked by all kinds of contradictions. The administration is reportedly considering numerous policies to convince people to have more children, such as “baby bonuses” of $5,000 or medals for mothers who have six or more kids. The Department of Transportation has issued a memo directing the agency to “give preference to communities with marriage and birth rates higher than the national average”. And JD Vance has proclaimed: “I want more babies in the United States of America.”These moves are, in part, fueled by the growing power of the pronatalism movement, which believes that the declining birthrate in the US is an existential threat to its workforce and its future.Why, then, does the government want to exclude an estimated 150,000 babies born every year?“It’s hard to look at any of these policies and not believe that they’re created for the purpose of satisfying a political base that was promised some sort of notions of recreating a nostalgia for a white Christian nationalist nation,” said P Deep Gulasekaram, a professor of immigration law at the University of Colorado Law School.If the fate of the US workforce is really of concern, experts say immigration could help grow it – but the Trump administration has taken a hardline stance against immigrants from the Global South and their children. The administration has not only reportedly turned the refugee agency responsible for caring for children who arrive in the US alone into an arm of Ice, but also slashed funding for legal representation of children in immigration proceedings. Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress are trying to block parents who lack Social Security Numbers – such as undocumented people – from benefiting from the child tax credit, even in cases where their children are US citizens.The Trump administration has also unveiled new screening protocols that make it far more difficult for undocumented people to “sponsor”, or take custody of, children who enter the US alone. Just last week, the National Center for Youth Law and the legal advocacy group Democracy Forward sued the Trump administration over the changes, which they say have forced kids to languish in government custody. Between December 2024 and March 2025, kids went from spending an average of two months in government custody to spending an average of six.“This administration has compromised the basic health and safety of immigrant children in egregious ways,” Neha Desai, managing director of children’s human rights and dignity at the National Center for Youth Law, said in an email.In March, KFF, a charity that conducts health policy research, conducted focus groups of Hispanic adults who are undocumented or likely living with someone who is undocumented. Many spoke of the effect that the Trump administration’s policies are having on their families and kids.“I have a six-year-old child. Honestly, I’m afraid to take him to the park, and he asks me, ‘Mom, why don’t we go to the park?’” one 49-year-old Costa Rican immigrant woman told KFF. “How do I tell him? I’m scared.”“Even the children worry. ‘Mom, did you get home safely?’ They’re already thinking that something is going to happen to us on the street,” added a 54-year-old Colombian immigrant woman. “So that also makes me very nervous, knowing that there might come a time when they could be left here alone.”The supreme court arguments on Thursday centered not on the constitutionality of birthright citizenship, but on the legality of lower court orders in the case. Still, some of the justices expressed concerns about what the case could mean for children.Eliminating birthright citizenship, Justice Elena Kagan suggested, could render children stateless. The high court needed a way to act fast, she said.If the justices believe that a court order is wrong, she asked, “why should we permit those countless others to be subject to what we think is an unlawful executive action?”Both the historical and legal record make clear that the 14th Amendment encapsulates birthright citizenship, Gulasekaram said. But, he said, predicting the supreme court’s moves is a “fool’s errand”.“There’s really no way of getting around the the conclusion that this is a call to some form of racial threat and racial solidarity as a way of shoring up support from a particular part of the of the of the Trump base,” Gulasekaram said. “Citizenship and the acquisition of citizenship has always been racially motivated in the United States.” More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      This pregnant woman sued Trump over birthright citizenship. Now it’s up to the supreme court

      by

      With the highest court in the US poised to hear her case – and decide her family’s future – Monica was keeping busy babyproofing her house.Monica is a plaintiff in one of three lawsuits challenging Donald Trump’s birthright citizenship order, a case that is being heard before the nation’s highest court on Thursday. She’s expecting her first child in early August.The Guardian first spoke with her in January, not long after Trump took office and signed an executive order seeking to end the constitutionally recognized right of birthright citizenship. Since then, she said, her belly has grown bigger, her feet more swollen. And she is still waiting to see whether her baby will be born as a citizen, or stateless.“We can only wait and hope,” she said. “Let’s wait in faith and trust in the laws of this country.”The Guardian is not publishing Monica’s surname, to protect her from retribution. She and her husband fled political persecution in Venezuela in 2019, and came to the US seeking asylum. The couple had been waiting for their immigration court hearing when they found out, in early January, that Monica was pregnant.“We were so excited,” she said. Just two weeks later, news of Trump’s executive order landed like a blow. Acquiring Venezuelan citizenship for their child would be impossible – both Monica and her husband were outspoken critics of their country’s autocratic leader, Nicolás Maduro – and contacting the government could put them in danger.“I had to fight for my baby,” she said.She had been a member of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (Asap), a non-profit group that advocates for immigrant rights, and when lawyers from the group reached out to expecting parents to see if any would like to join a lawsuit challenging Trump’s order, Monica felt compelled to respond.Two immigration advocacy groups, Asap and Casa, are named as plaintiffs alongside Monica and four other mothers in one of three cases challenging the executive order. A second case was filed by four states and pregnant women, and a third by 18 states, the District of Columbia and San Francisco. The supreme court is hearing these cases consolidated as one.Other than her mother and a few close relatives, nobody knows that she is involved in one of the most closely watched cases to come before the supreme court this year. She has concealed her identity and tried to maintain a low profile, to avoid biasing her family’s asylum case, and to protect her family in Venezuela.But the topic of birthright citizenship and the administration’s intention to end it often comes up in her conversations with friends – especially with immigrant mothers who, like her, worry about their babies’ futures. “We are all on standby,” she said.They worry, too, about news that mothers are being separated from their babies – or being deported alongside their children. “Every day there are new changes, there are new executive orders about us immigrants,” she said. “Every day there is more fear in immigration conditions.”In the meantime, she said, there’s nothing to do but focus on the day to day. Monica and her husband have kept busy getting their home baby-ready, purchasing and assembling cribs and car seats. Now that she’s in her third trimester, she’s packed a go-bag with a change of clothes and other essentials – ready in case she needs to rush to the hospital. “We’re really down to the last few weeks already,” she said.Recently, they settled on a name. More

    • 200 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Keep calm (but delete your nudes): the new rules for travelling to and from Trump’s America

      by

      Kindness doesn’t cost a thing. Putting up a big “no foreigners welcome” sign, threatening to annex your neighbour, and throwing visitors to your country into detention for minor visa infractions, however? Such actions are expensive. The United States is on track to lose $12.5bn (£9.4bn) in international travel spending this year, according to a study published on Tuesday by the World Travel and Tourism Council.If the Trump administration is concerned that its aggressive rhetoric is costing tourist dollars, it’s not showing it. During a recent press conference about the 2026 Fifa World Cup, which will be jointly hosted by the US, Mexico and Canada, vice president JD Vance joked about deporting football fans who outstay their welcome. “We’ll have visitors from close to 100 countries. We want them to come…” Vance said. “But when the time is up, they’ll have to go home, otherwise they’ll have to talk to [Homeland Security] secretary Noem.” That’s Kristi Noem, the woman who shot her own dog. Not someone you want to talk to when she’s in a bad mood.Judging by the drop-off in visitors, many people have decided that a trip to the US just isn’t worth the risk right now. As a green card holder – and someone with family in the UK who have been thoroughly put off coming to visit the US – this is a question I’ve been wrestling with for the past few months. So, for somewhat selfish reasons, I spoke to a number of immigration lawyers and civil rights experts to try to figure out the new rules, across different demographics, for travelling to and from Trump’s America.View image in fullscreenFirst, though: the big picture. It is hard to quantify exactly how much things have changed at the border since the start of Trump’s second term. There have been plenty of scary stories in the news but that might not reflect a policy shift – it could just mean the media is paying more attention to the subject. Murali Bashyam, an immigration lawyer based in North Carolina, believes that while “there are more issues at the port-of-entry than before”, fears of being detained “are overblown to some extent”.Other immigration lawyers are more worried. Camille Mackler, executive director of a legal service provider collaborative called Immigrant Arc, stresses: “Things have fundamentally shifted – although whether that shift is happening systematically at the airport level or on an individual officer level is harder to say.” But, she says, there seems to be a clear trend: “The Trump administration wants to increase deportation numbers, and they’re going after any case they can. Enforcement has become much more aggressive.”According to Golnaz Fakhimi, legal director of Muslim Advocates, one of the biggest shifts is “the targeting of non-citizens based on viewpoints and ideology”. There are two executive orders that set the stage for this targeting: EO 1461 Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats, and EO 14188, Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism. The first EO lays the groundwork to deport or deny entry to foreigners based on their political and cultural views. The second uses a broad definition of antisemitism that includes criticism of Israel’s policies or government.Since Trump passed those orders, says Fakhimi, “there’s been a lot of rhetoric reinforcing those policies and we’ve seen actual instances of what looks like viewpoint-based scrutiny. All of this points to a kind of risk that non-citizens – including lawful permanent residents – should be aware of, especially when it comes to ideological expression.”View image in fullscreenCriticism of the Israeli government or support for Palestinian rights seems to be at the “forefront of what’s being targeted” now, says Fakhimi. “But many of us worry that the scrutiny won’t stay limited to those viewpoints. It may already be expanding. There was one case reported in the media involving a French researcher who was denied entry, possibly because of content on their phone that was critical of the US president. Inside the US, we’ve also seen targeting of immigrant-rights activists – Jeanette Vizguerra in Colorado for example.”Kseniia Petrova, a Russian-born researcher at Harvard Medical School who has been detained since February, may have been targeted because of her political views. “So it’s important for non-citizens to be clear-eyed about what viewpoints they’ve publicly expressed – especially online – when considering the risks of international travel.”View image in fullscreenIt’s also prudent to assume that your social media activity has been examined. “Social media identifiers are now required on forms like the visa application or Esta [for the visa waiver programme],” says Sophia Cope, senior staff attorney on the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s civil liberties team. “We’ve heard anecdotal reports of agents referencing social media during questioning.”It is not only non-citizens who should be worried. Hasan Piker, a left-wing YouTuber and US citizen, was recently held and questioned for hours by US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials in Chicago after returning from France. In a video, Piker says the agents seemed to know who he was and asked about his political beliefs, including repeated questions about his views of Hamas. A CBP official called the suggestion that Piker was targeted for his political views “baseless”.View image in fullscreenAmir Makled, a Lebanese-American lawyer representing one of the University of Michigan pro-Palestine campus protesters, was recently stopped at Detroit Metro airport and interrogated by a tactical terrorism response team agent. Makled has said the agents knew exactly who he was; his phone was searched and they asked about his contacts. Eventually, he was allowed to go home.The Makled case was very troubling, says Cope, because it suggests targeting based on political association. “CBP denied this, but during the inspection, they asked to see his contact list. That implies they weren’t interested in him, but in who he knew. That’s outrageous. We litigated a case on this for four years – unfortunately, the courts didn’t rule in our favour – but we learned that CBP believes it has the authority to search devices not just when the traveller is a suspect, but also to gather intelligence on someone else the traveller may be connected to … It’s a form of dragnet intelligence gathering.”When it comes to intelligence gathering at the border, officials have carte blanche. After your international flight lands on US soil and before you clear customs, you are in something of a no man’s land in relation to civil rights. “The normal fourth amendment requirement of a warrant or individualised suspicion doesn’t apply,” says Nate Freed Wessler, a lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union. Some states offer slightly more protection than others, however. In the ninth circuit, which covers the western US, the rules are “most protective”, says Wessler. “For a manual search (where an agent is just scrolling through your phone), no individual suspicion is needed, but the search must be for digital contraband – like classified documents.“For a forensic search, where they plug your phone into a device to extract and analyse the entire contents, there must be reasonable suspicion that the phone contains digital contraband. And if the purpose is anything else, like gathering intelligence or helping another domestic agency, then a warrant would be required.”For most of the country, however, it’s anything goes. “The only minimal protection CBP has in their policy is distinguishing between manual and forensic searches. For a forensic search, they say they need reasonable suspicion, but they don’t define what that means. For a manual search, there are no guardrails. They argue it’s less invasive, but that’s just not true. They can still do keyword searches and spend hours combing through your device.”View image in fullscreenThey don’t have access to everything on your phone, however. Customs and Border Protection policy requires agents to put devices in flight mode before searching, to avoid accessing cloud data. It’s not a bad idea to put your phone in flight mode before you travel to understand what is stored on the cloud and what is local.What if you refuse to give your passcode to officers or say you don’t consent to a search? Consequences differ depending on your immigration status. If you’re a green card holder or citizen they can still take your phone. “They can’t compel you to give your passcode, but they can seize the phone and send it to a forensic lab, where it might sit for weeks or months while they try to break into it,” says Wessler. “For visa holders, it’s trickier. If you refuse to unlock your phone, they may just deny you entry, claiming you’re not cooperating in assessing admissibility.” And in the very worst scenario they might throw you into a detention centre before sending you home.Searches, to be clear, are still very rare. “Claims that CBP is searching more electronic media due to the administration change are false,” CBP assistant commissioner of public affairs Hilton Beckham said in a statement last month. “CBP’s search numbers are consistent with increases since 2021, and less than 0.01% of travellers have their devices searched … Allegations that political beliefs trigger inspections or removals are baseless and irresponsible.”If you’re worried these allegations aren’t quite as baseless as CBP insists, Wessler says: “The safest approach is not to travel with data you wouldn’t want the US government to access.”Let’s say you’re a British citizen who has been outspoken, on social media and elsewhere, about your pro-Palestinian or anti-Trump views. Would it be a foolish idea to travel to the US right now? “I wouldn’t say ‘don’t come,’ but I’d say evaluate your risk and risk tolerance,” says Wessler. “The government is being extremely aggressive with students and activists, and there’s always a chance a border agent might act on something they find politically disagreeable. Most travellers are still fine – but the risk is real and well above zero.” So, basically, nothing is very clear? Pretty much, says Wessler. “The law is a complete mess, and people’s options are a complete mess. People just have to make a risk assessment based on extremely imperfect information.”The first step in making that risk assessment is to thoroughly understand the rules for the specific visa you’ll be travelling on or your immigration status. “The Foreign Affairs Manual is a great resource,” says immigration lawyer Tahmina Watson. “It’s what consular officers use, and it’s publicly accessible. It lays out what officers are looking for, visa by visa. We’re now advising clients more than ever to understand the B1/B2 visa rules. B1 is for business, B2 for tourism. When CBP asks why you’re here, they’re listening for key phrases – ‘I’m visiting my grandmother,’ ‘I’m going to Disneyland,’ etc. The manual also talks about proof of ties to your home country – job, house, bills. That stuff matters.”Having any sort of criminal record or contact with the criminal legal system is a major part of a risk assessment. “I just spoke with a US citizen who had married a green card holder,” says Watson. “They were returning from their honeymoon when he was detained. He had a conviction from when he was 18, served his time, and had travelled internationally for more than 30 years since without issue. But this time, he was detained, and it will be very difficult to get him out.”If you’re a green card holder with a criminal record, Watson strongly advises against leaving the country. “Not until you’ve spoken with a lawyer. Even a long-ago conviction can result in detention now.” If you’ve ever overstayed a visa, even for a day, you should also speak to a lawyer before travelling.Students have their own set of issues to look for. “For students or others with campus affiliations, we’d want to know if there’s been any scrutiny or disciplinary action at the university level,” says Fakhimi. “Another factor is whether any third parties have tried to spotlight or mischaracterise your views to attract federal attention. Groups like Betar US, for example, have devoted resources to building lists of political protesters they want deported.”And then, of course, you’ve got to think about any public statements you’ve made and whether you can or should delete them. “For some, minimising the visibility of their views might feel like the right way to reduce risk,” says Fakhimi. “For others, staying publicly vocal and visible with their beliefs might feel too important to compromise. It’s really about what trade-offs someone is willing to make, and what decision they can live with.”One thing that sustains Fakhimi, she says, is how many people are unwilling to censor themselves for their safety. “I’ve been incredibly moved and inspired by the courage of non-citizens – people with precarious status, even undocumented – who continue to speak out on a range of injustices. They see these issues as interconnected, and despite the risks, they’re standing firm.” Sometimes, staying true to your beliefs is more important than a trip to Disney World. More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: President shrugs off Qatar jet fury, announces $96bn Boeing deal

      by

      As Donald Trump brushed off fierce criticism over his plan to accept a $400m luxury jet from the Qatari government, the president announced a lucrative deal for Boeing to supply the Gulf nation with 210 planes.Trump announced the $96bn contract – the largest-ever order of widebody Boeing planes – during a trip to Doha on Wednesday. The White House claims the aviation agreement will support 154,000 American jobs annually, though it was unclear how those figures were calculated.Trump has said Qatar’s offer for a Boeing 747-8 jetliner to use as Air Force One was too good to refuse, complaining the current presidential aircraft in underwhelming.“The plane that you’re on is almost 40 years old,” Trump told the Fox News host Sean Hannity during an interview on Air Force One. “When you land and you see Saudi Arabia, you see UAE and you see Qatar, and they have these brand-new Boeing 747s, mostly. You see ours next to it – this is like a totally different plane.”US-Qatar strike deals worth $243bnThe Qatar Airways purchase of Boeing jets formed the centrepiece of several economic agreements signed in Doha valued at more than $243bn. Trump also secured a statement of intent for more than $38bn in future defense investments from Qatar, further intertwining America’s economic and security relationships with the Gulf state now offering him a luxury aircraft.Read the full storyTrump meets Syria’s ‘attractive’ president Trump met Syria’s president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, in Saudi Arabia, telling the former jihadist he had an “extraordinary opportunity” and said Washington is exploring normalizing ties with Damascus. His comments come a day after he announced all US sanctions on Syria would be lifted.Read the full storyRFK Jr tells Congress ‘people shouldn’t take medical advice from me’The US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, refused to say whether he would vaccinate his children if he had to choose today, and defended Republicans’ proposal to cut healthcare to fund tax cut extensions.While he said he would “probably” vaccinate his children for measles, he added that his “opinions about vaccines are irrelevant … I don’t want to seem like I’m being evasive, but I don’t think people should be taking advice, medical advice, from me.”Read the full storyJudge orders release of Indian academic held by IceA Virginia federal judge has ordered the immediate release of Georgetown academic Badar Khan Suri from Ice detention during a hearing. Khan Suri was among several individuals legally studying in the US who have been targeted by the Trump administration for pro-Palestinian activism. He has spent two months in detention.Read the full storyTrump official scrutinized for links to El Salvador crypto Trump administration’s commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, and his family have had extensive business interests linked to El Salvador, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission and Office of Government Ethics, as well as public records in the US and El Salvador. The country’s authoritarian leader, Nayib Bukele, has grown close to the White House and has courted controversy by allowing the imprisonment of people deported in the US’s immigration crackdown to a notorious Cecot prison.Read the full storyRepublican tax bill may exclude millions of families from creditsRepublicans’ newest tax bill threatens to exclude millions of families from a tax credit meant to ease household financial burdens, even as conservatives are increasingly claiming policies designed to entice families to have more babies.Read the full storyLindsey Graham to brief European leaders on Russia sanctionsUS senator, Lindsey Graham, a close ally of Donald Trump, is expected to brief European leaders on Thursday in Antalya on his plans to push through Congress sanctions designed to devastate the Russian economy if Vladimir Putin does not show a willingness to negotiate the future of Ukraine in good faith.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      California’s governor wants his state to stop enrolling more low-income immigrants without legal status in a state-funded healthcare program in 2026.

      A former special counsel prosecutor invoked the fifth amendment during a deposition before a Republican-led committee probing alleged politicization in Trump’s prosecutions.

      The Trump administration’s transportation secretary switched his wife’s flight to help her avoid flying out of troubled Newark Liberty airport, one of the busiest in the New York area.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened on 13 May 2025. More