Keir Starmer is out, Andy Burnham is in.

On Monday, outgoing Prime Minister Starmer traveled to Buckingham Palace to tender his resignation to King Charles III. Shortly afterward, his successor, Andy Burnham, made the same journey and was invited by the king to form a new government.

Burnham then returned to Downing Street, where he delivered his first remarks as prime minister. He said, "it requires my generation of politicians to raise our game." He said politicians are "acknowledging that many voters have grown frustrated with politics."

"I want to be honest with you: we have not been good enough and we need to be better. We will be," Burnham said.

Burnham becomes the U.K.'s seventh prime minister in a decade, since Britons voted in June 2016 to leave the European Union. That decision ultimately shrank the British economy, triggered anger at the governing class, and contributed to a revolving door of prime ministers.

Starmer exits after two years

Starmer delivered his final speech outside 10 Downing Street earlier on Monday before heading to Buckingham Palace to formally resign as prime minister, declaring: "My work is done."

"In six and a half years I took our party from a historic defeat in 2019, changed it so it was fit to face the country, and won a landslide general election victory in 2024," Starmer said. He described serving as prime minister as "the privilege of my life" and said he was leaving office confident Britain was "stronger and fairer" than it was two years ago.

Closing his final address outside Downing Street, Starmer said, "I go with good grace, I go with a smile, and I go proud of everything we have achieved."

Starmer led the U.K.'s center-left Labour Party to a landslide victory two years ago. But his personal approval ratings sank. Polls show voters believe he failed to deliver palpable change. He was also criticized for appointing Peter Mandelson, a close friend of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, as British ambassador to Washington. Starmer later fired Mandelson.

After Labour lost seats to a populist anti-immigration party in May's local elections, more of Starmer's own lawmakers joined calls for his removal.

Starmer resigned as Labour leader on June 22, and Burnham assumed that role Friday. Under Britain's parliamentary system, the ruling party can replace its leader — and therefore the prime minister — without a general election. The next election is not expected for another three years.

Burnham's first remarks as prime minister

Burnham previously served as a Member of Parliament for 16 years, holding several cabinet roles in the Labour governments of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. He ran twice for the Labour leadership, receiving a nomination from Starmer during the 2015 contest, before leaving Parliament to become mayor of Greater Manchester.

As mayor, Burnham championed investment and devolution in the post-industrial region, and has pledged to bring a similar approach to the U.K. nationally. He returned to Parliament in a special election last month.

Standing outside Downing Street Burnham said he will announce measures to help with the cost of living on Tuesday, promising immediate support for households while setting out plans for longer-term change.

The new prime minister said his government would be "a circuit breaker for Britain, bringing forward the biggest changes in the last 40 years."

"I can do something to give people some breathing space now, some help with the cost of living," Burnham said.

He added, "I will soon go through that door behind me and issue my first instruction: to end rough sleeping in our country." Burnham also said he would unveil a 10-year plan for Britain later this year.

A new prime minister, familiar challenges

Born and raised in the grittier north of England, Burnham has cultivated a working-class hero vibe, often wearing T-shirts rather than suits, and advocating for blue-collar workers. He moonlights as a DJ on Manchester's indie music scene. His social media videos have been compared to New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani's.

Polls show he's one of the most popular U.K. politicians.

In terms of policy, Burnham has said he'll scrap plans for digital ID cards, reverse the privatization of public transit and utilities, and devolve power away from the capital, London, toward municipal and regional authorities.

In recent days, there have been reports that Burnham might ease a ban on new drilling for oil and gas in the North Sea — which won him immediate praise from President Trump on social media on Sunday. Trump wrote that with North Sea drilling, Burnham would transform the U.K. from "a Poverty Stricken Disaster, to one of the Richest Countries anywhere in the World!"

European leaders have begun congratulating Andy Burnham on becoming the U.K.'s new prime minister, with an invitation for his first foreign trip already arriving from Berlin.

Ireland's Prime Minister Micheál Martin welcomed Burnham's appointment, saying he hoped to work with him to strengthen ties between the U.K., Ireland and the European Union.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Britain and Germany remained "close allies and partners," and invited Burnham to visit Berlin.

But Burnham is likely to face some of the same challenges that stymied Starmer: Rising costs of living, slow growth, and that volatile American ally across the Atlantic.

Copyright 2026, NPR

Wisconsin Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez abandoned her Democratic primary campaign for governor on Friday, citing financial concerns she said would be a distraction were she to continue running in the Midwestern battleground state.

The move comes just days after Rodriguez, a leading establishment Democrat from the pivotal Milwaukee suburbs, fired her campaign manager after discovering her campaign had hundreds of thousands of dollars less on hand than expected.

“As we have continued to dig into our financial reports, it has become clear there are issues that would be an ongoing distraction,” Rodriguez said in a social media post Friday. “Part of being a leader is taking swift action, doing the right thing and being as honest as possible when there's a problem."

“And because I believe that, I cannot, in good conscience, allow these questions to become a cloud over an election Democrats need to win,” she added.

The shake-up comes less than a month from the primary election on Aug. 11, when Democrats will be choosing a successor to Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat who opted not to seek a third term.

Rodriguez had been endorsed by Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, who quit his campaign on July 8, over remaining Democratic candidates, including democratic socialist Francesca Hong, former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes and others.

Any screen, it seems, is a good place to launch an attack ad.

Local television, cable, YouTube and other streaming platforms are awash in political ads — a sign of a competitive U.S. Senate nomination race between two Democratic candidates.

U.S. Rep. Angie Craig, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan and outside groups have been buying up ad time across screens. The spots toggle between making their case or trying to torpedo their opponent.

Some ads make the case for the candidate.

“I’ve spent my life leading the fight to raise the minimum wage, pass paid leave, and actually help people. This is about who's on your side, and I'm with you,” Flanagan says in one ad.

"Washington has been rigging the game for a long time. I voted to impeach Trump twice, led the fight to stop insider trading, banned Congress from becoming lobbyists, and forced big pharma to lower costs,” Craig says in another.

But another, often more-caustic slough of ads make the rounds on those same platforms.

Political action committees are pouring money into the race. They use their ad time to bash the opponent of their favored candidate. There, Craig is the lopsided beneficiary. One PAC, North Star Dawn, is airing hundreds of commercials per week — sometimes multiple ads during the same TV program.

"Peggy Flanagan is hiding that she racked up special interest donations from big tobacco, big oil, even a company that builds ICE detention centers. That's who funded Peggy Flanagan. That's wrong,” one North Star Dawn ad says.

The ad is a response to commercials by a PAC promoting Flanagan — the Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association. Flanagan has distanced herself from those donations for the national group where she was once the chair and has told the organization to return those donations.

Keep watching, and a response from DLGA attacking Craig will likely pop up. The group has targeted Craig's financial backers and donors and her prior votes on immigration enforcement legislation.

"DC insider Angie Craig, bankrolled by Trump donors, crypto and A.I. tech billionaires, but no amount of money can change the fact that Angie Craig was the only Minnesota Democrat to vote for Trump's bill giving ICE more power to detain our neighbors as they terrorized communities,” the DLGA ad says.

Craig has voiced regret for supporting the immigration measures early in 2025 as President Trump returned to the White House.

The key to all of these ads is, of course, money.

PACs supporting Craig have put up millions of dollars so far, including $9.4 million from North Star Dawn as of this week. Other groups have added millions more supporting Craig. The DLGA has spent around $1.6 million on ads to date supporting Flanagan.

With so many spots on the air, it can sometimes feel like watching an argument that has poured from behind podiums onto screens.

During a press conference last week, Flanagan railed against the money flowing into ads attacking her.

"The flood of ads attempting to redeem Congresswoman Craig and attack my record are being paid for by five super PACs and outside dark money groups with no accountability to the people of Minnesota,” Flanagan said. “They've already spent more than $12 million which is about a ratio of about 10 to one."

“Minnesotans have to ask, what do they think they're buying? I think the answer is simple. They like the way that she votes,” Flanagan added.

At an event in St. Cloud, Craig said she can only control ads she's running — and there are a lot of those, too. But she said major races get rough and require a stiff spine.

“I’ve had five competitive races. Outside groups have spent 50 million dollars running against me. I've never called a press conference to cry about it — not one time,” she said. “This is what it looks like to run in a competitive race. And you know, if the lieutenant governor thinks this is bad, wait until Republicans come after her.”

That’s actually a theme of a new ad from the Craig campaign, which features clips of news interviews with Republican strategists and political analysts.

“The Republicans are very much hoping that Flanagan is the nominee because they believe they have a much better chance against her than against Craig,” Carleton College professor Steven Schier says, during an interview with KSTP-TV political reporter Tom Hauser. The ad also quotes former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty.

Meanwhile, the GOP side of the Senate race is far quieter, with less public sparring.

Former sports broadcaster Michele Tafoya is running ads on local television and FOX News on cable. Her chief rivals in the August primary — Adam Schwarze and Royce White — have less money and, therefore, fewer ads.

Minnesota House Speaker Lisa Demuth and former sports broadcaster Michele Tafoya each put an arm around the other and smiled wide last week as they prepared for the Pan-O-Prog parade.

Surrounded by local lawmakers and GOP candidates, they posed for photos and rallied volunteers. To an untrained eye, the duo lined up in the parade behind local candidates could come off as the Minnesota Republican Party’s official slate.

But the pair lost their party’s endorsing contests in May; Tafoya came up shy of the Senate endorsement and Demuth lost after several ballots in the governor’s race. But they’re vying to buck the recent historical precedent — and move on to the general election through Aug. 11 Republican primaries wins.

“Neither one of us is endorsed, and we're pushing hard, and we feel like we're in it to win it,” Tafoya said. “We have been crisscrossing the state, doing parades, talking to people.”

This year, Demuth and Tayofa are in the hunt. They have more money than their rivals and broad recognition. They tell primary voters they’re better equipped to break Republicans’ two-decade losing streak in statewide races than their endorsed peers — former Navy SEAL Adam Schwarze for Senate and businessman Kendall Qualls for governor.

Another contender, MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, is also vying for the party’s nomination for governor. His cause was helped in a big way this week with a significant endorsement – from President Donald Trump.

Typically for Republicans, the endorsement is a critical path to the nomination. No candidate for Senate or governor has gotten to November without it in three decades.

In 1994, then-Gov. Arne Carlson won a primary after being bypassed at the convention. Two years later, the party deadlocked on an endorsement after 14 ballots in the 1996 Senate race, and former Sen. Rudy Boschwitz then cruised to a primary win. But in every race since, the endorsement has been golden.

With stances of most of the Republican candidates overlapping — they’re all talking about fraud, spending, taxes and election integrity — the onus is on campaigns to find other ways to appeal to GOP voters.

“They are fed up, but they are excited, and they're so enthusiastic about this campaign,” she said, pointing to fundraising numbers and other metrics that she contends prove it. “They speak volumes about all the support that we're getting from every county in the state.”

Tafoya has a wide advantage on that front. Her $2.6 million raised in the past few months was almost 10 times more than her closest GOP competitor.

Demuth likewise had a yawning money edge over the others in the Republican governor’s race, with updated reports due later this month.

Demuth said she and Tafoya are running distinct races. That is, they haven’t been intentionally adjacent in their bids for the GOP nomination. But she expects their pool of support in next month’s primary to be similar.

“When people look at who's a good candidate that can actually win and turn this state around, maybe people are looking at me for that, and probably some of the same people are looking at Michele Tafoya for that too, a very solid candidate that could win,” Demuth said.

Qualls and Schwarze landed party backing with their political outsider messaging. But Demuth says Republicans need candidates who can appeal to voters in both August and November, which requires reaching beyond the base.

“The things that we're doing now for the primary are the same things that are going to carry us through into the general. It's the same message. It's the same universe of people that just want to see our state get back on track,” Demuth said.

In Brainerd this week, Qualls was pressed by a voter about whether he was the candidate best suited to win a general election. He told dozens of local Republican voters and organizers that the best path for Republicans is to come together behind the slate of endorsed candidates.

“We have a Republican Party that's in civil war. We have a wing of the party that doesn't want the endorsement process,” Qualls said at the event for endorsed candidates. “Here's the issue about winning: We’ve got to be unified.”

He said if the party is fractured, that’s trouble. “We’ve got to excite the base,” he said. “I’ve demonstrated, I've been campaigning 11 months, I can excite the base.”

Bruce Cunningham, of Crosslake, posed the question about electability.

“The problem we've had is we've had good candidates, but they have not been electable by the middle, and that was the core of my question: Who is going to attract those middle voters that are really the ones that are going to make the decision this November?” Cunningham said in an interview.

Cunningham said he’s backing Qualls and Tafoya in the primary.

“Name recognition, I think, is the biggest thing,” Cunningham said. “Michele, because of her sports background, also has more recognition among male voters, which I unfortunately think is going to be a big factor.”

Others at the Brainerd event said Republican delegates vetted and picked their endorsed candidates for a reason and they don’t plan to depart from that convention recommendation.

“I'm probably going to vote this way because that's what we have decided as a Republican Party to endorse the candidates when they were endorsed in Duluth,” said Rose Stromberg, of Ironton.

Mary Rono, of Crosby, agreed.

“They vetted them. They made sure that they were ‘America First’ candidates and express our values,” Rono said. “So we want candidates that stand for the people.”

Schwarze, the party’s endorsed candidate for U.S. senator, argues the party isn’t well served by a drawn out contest.

“We do better when we fight together as a team on the battlefield,” Schwarze said. “We would be fighting together to take back our state if we were all rowing in the same direction. But it is kind of a unique thing about Republicans, right? We don't play team ball as well as the Democrats.”

On Aug. 11, primary voters will decide which direction that boat is headed.

When major disasters strike, Americans are routinely waiting weeks — or even months — to receive presidential approval for aid. And if they live in a state that didn't support President Donald Trump, chances are greater that aid will be denied.

Since taking office last year, Trump has approved about 65 requests for major disaster declarations and denied more than two dozen others from states, tribes or territories seeking federal financial assistance following hurricanes, tornadoes, storms, floods and fires.

Trump has taken longer on average to approve disaster requests than any other president, according to an Associated Press analysis of data dating back to 1989, when a federal law setting new parameters for disaster determinations was implemented. And no other president has such a disparity in denials between states that supported him politically and those that did not.

The delays and denials come as Trump's administration contemplates a makeover of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which administers disaster aid. Major disaster declarations are intended for events that are beyond the resources of state and local governments.

Trump is saying yes to Republicans more than Democrats

During his second term, Trump has denied a greater percentage of disaster requests than any president dating to 1989. Those denials have not been evenly distributed among states.

Trump has approved 80 percent of the disaster requests from Republican governors but only about 60 percent from Democratic governors, according to the AP's analysis of FEMA data.

The discrepancy is even more apparent when analyzing major disaster declarations based on presidential elections. Trump has approved more than three-fourths of the requests from states that voted for him in the 2024 election but less than half the requests from states that did not. Although there are federal criteria for disaster aid, decisions ultimately are at the president’s discretion.

A batch of denials earlier this month included four Democratic states — Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island — seeking federal aid for a February snowstorm.

“The President’s denial is part of a pattern of extreme partisanship as he tries to shift a heavier economic burden onto blue states. Disaster aid should be merit-based, not politicized,” Rhode Island's Democratic U.S. Senate and House members said in a joint statement.

White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement that “there is no politicization to the President’s decisions on disaster relief.”

During his first term, Trump actually approved a greater share of requests from states that had opposed him than those that supported him.

Yet no other president had such a wide partisan divide in disaster declarations as currently exists under Trump. Obama approved 87 percent of the disaster requests from Democratic governors during his second term and 79 percent from Republican governors, but Obama's approval rate was identical for states that voted for and against him.

When requests are denied, individuals, insurers and local governments are left to shoulder the costs themselves.

Trump is waiting longer to declare disasters

Since Trump assumed office last year, it’s taken him an average of a month and a half to approve major disaster declarations after receiving a request from the governor or chief executive of a state, territory or tribe, the AP found. Because it can take several weeks after a disaster for officials to inspect the damage and submit a request, the total wait time often has exceeded two months.

By comparison, Trump approved major disaster requests in an average of about three weeks during his first term, a pace similar to President Joe Biden. Their predecessors — Presidents Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush — all had average disaster approval times of less than two weeks.

All presidents have taken longer to approve some requests. But that’s become the norm in Trump’s second term. Of Trump’s approvals, 70 percent have taken at least a month — up from about one-quarter of requests during Trump’s first term and Biden’s administration, and fewer than 10 percent under their predecessors.

Jackson said that Trump conducts a more thorough review than any administration before him, “ensuring American tax dollars are used appropriately and efficiently by the states to supplement — not substitute — their obligation to respond to and recover from disasters.”

The longer the approval process takes, the longer people must wait to receive federal aid for daily living expenses, temporary lodging and home repairs. Delays in major disaster declarations also can hamper recovery efforts by local officials uncertain whether they will receive federal reimbursement for cleaning up debris and rebuilding infrastructure.

FEMA nominee is pledging faster decisions

FEMA has had four different temporary leaders since Trump took office in January 2025. One of those, Cameron Hamilton, is awaiting Senate confirmation as the agency's permanent director.

During a Senate committee hearing last month, Hamilton said he would try to speed up disaster declaration decisions and reimbursements. He also pledged to ensure that FEMA is objective, fair and reasonable in reviewing disaster declaration requests and making recommendations to the president.

Hamilton, a former Navy SEAL, had been fired as FEMA's acting director in May 2025 after publicly disagreeing with Trump's idea of dismantling the agency. His reemergence signals that Trump now may support changes to FEMA instead of an outright elimination of the agency.

Panel's recommendations could lead to more denials

A council appointed by Trump has recommended a series of changes to FEMA that would shift greater responsibility to states, potentially reducing the number of major disaster declarations and the amount of federal money paid out.

The council suggested revised criteria to qualify for presidential declarations, including a prerequisite of annual minimum expenditures by states, territories and tribes.

Another recommendation, which would require congressional approval, would reduce the federal government's share of the disaster aid from a minimum of 75 percent to 50 percent of the costs, leaving state and local governments more to cover. For governments approved for assistance, federal funding could get there quicker — within 30 days of a federal disaster declaration, instead of waiting months or years for reimbursements that are based on proof of expenditures.

For individuals, the council recommended consolidating several different types of aid into one payment targeted for those whose homes are uninhabitable.

In the weeks after Donald Trump lost to Joe Biden in 2020, the people Trump appointed to run the Department of Justice, cybersecurity agencies and intelligence departments all said the same thing — the election was fair, legitimate and free of major fraud or foreign interference.

In his second term, Trump, a Republican, has tried to use the levers of power to rewrite that well-settled history, something that he's expected to try again on Thursday night with an address to the nation.

He has already appointed loyalists who have echoed his false claims that the 2020 election was stolen and made clear he expects everyone to follow his lead.

In an indication of how fealty to Trump’s lies has become a litmus test for his administration, many of his nominees have steadfastly refused to directly answer the question of who won in 2020, preferring to tersely note that Biden, a Democrat, became president. Jay Clayton, Trump’s nominee to become the next national intelligence director, was the latest to repeat that formula in his confirmation hearing on Wednesday.

“He had the most electoral votes," Clayton said of Biden. “He was declared the winner.”

“And who has the most electoral votes? Is it the person who wins or the person who loses?” asked Sen. Mark Kelly, an Arizona Democrat.

“That’s your characterization," Clayton responded. "I’m not going to continue to do this.”

The president has embraced baroque conspiracy theories about an international cabal that penetrated U.S. voting machines that have led to libel suits against his allies when they’ve repeated the claims.

Ahead of his speech, Trump has teased “really big news” and said “it doesn't get bigger, because without free and fair elections, you don't have a country.”

Election experts fear another round of falsehoods.

“There has been six-plus years of consistent findings from the intelligence community and from everyone who’s looked at it that there was no foreign interference in 2020, and our voting systems were secure and accurate,” said Victoria Bassetti of States United, a nonpartisan group supporting the state officials who run elections. “I suppose the president could come up with some new assertion or new conclusion. It would fly in the face of all the evidence.”

Huge range of reviews find same thing: No major fraud

There’s been an enormous amount of reviews of the 2020 election. Trump and his allies lost dozens of court cases challenging the results, sometimes before judges the president appointed himself. Numerous audits, recounts and investigations, including several by Republicans, found no major problems with the vote or count.

Trump's own attorney general at the time, William Barr, said there were no signs of significant fraud, a statement that earned him Trump's ire. Trump's appointee to run the agency that watches for cyberattacks on American election infrastructure, Chris Krebs, declared that the 2020 election was secure and there were no signs of tampering — which led Trump to fire Krebs and demand an investigation of him upon returning to power in 2025.

An intelligence assessment released in the early days of the Biden administration but completed on Jan. 7, 2021, in Trump's last days in office, found no foreign tampering with vote totals or election equipment in 2020. And, last year, Trump signed a federal document as part of a regular review of possible foreign influence in elections that declared “there has been no evidence of a foreign power altering the outcome or vote tabulation in any United States election.”

‘Untold taxpayer resources’ reinvestigating the election

Since returning to office, Trump has launched a review of the 2020 vote. Federal agents have seized voting records in Democratic-run Fulton County, Georgia, and Republican-run Maricopa County, Arizona — two major metropolitan swing state counties that figured prominently in 2020 conspiracy theories.

Trump tapped Kurt Olsen, a prominent lawyer in the world of election conspiracy theorists, to head the probe. Olsen was previously sanctioned by the Arizona Supreme Court for false statements in a lawsuit he brought to challenge the 2022 loss of an Arizona governor's race by one of Trump's allies.

"He has committed untold taxpayer resources,” said David Becker, a former Department of Justice lawyer who now leads the Center for Election Integrity & Research. “They’ve found nothing.”

A search warrant affidavit filed in the Fulton County case was full of old, debunked conspiracy theories about the vote in the county. The FBI reassigned hundreds of analysts to go through the material.

Conspiracy theories have led to libel cases

Still, election conspiracy theorists have been buzzing — as they have ever since Election Day in 2020 — that Trump is about to reveal irrefutable evidence of massive election fraud.

One version alleges that Venezuela and possibly other countries manipulated U.S. voting machines to deprive Trump of a victory. Venezuela's former president, Nicolas Maduro, is currently awaiting trial in Manhattan on federal charges of drug trafficking after the U.S. military took him from that country's capital.

Those theories have led to massive payouts in libel lawsuits brought by voting machine companies and others. Fox News paid $787.5 million to settle one lawsuit over it airing those claims and others on the air in late 2020. Conservative networks Newsmax andOne America News have also reached settlements with voting companies over airing those allegations.

A Denver jury found that Mike Lindell, a prominent election conspiracy theorist who Trump this week endorsed as a Republican candidate for governor in Minnesota, defamed an employee with a voting machine company by calling him a traitor.

Becker noted there has been a clear pattern over the six years of election conspiracy theories surrounding Trump's loss. Conspiracy theorists, including Trump himself, make sweeping allegations in public, sometimes with what seems to be massive reams of documentation from elaborate election databases. But they've lost regularly in court, where the threshold is whether there's any factual basis to the claims.

He suggested that anything new from Trump on elections be subjected to that same scrutiny.

"If someone’s alleging a crime that occurred six years ago, we shouldn’t be responding to their claims,” Becker said. “We should be demanding they meet the burden of proof.”

In the aftermath of two killings by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers in just over a week, a new report from the American Civil Liberties Union documents widespread use of force by the federal agency.

The report, released Thursday, looks at more than 1,200 immigration enforcement operations involving ICE officers or law enforcement working with ICE across eight states, beginning when President Trump took office in January 2025 until the end of last year.

The findings underscore the concerns many immigrant advocates have raised repeatedly as the Trump administration continues its aggressive deportation campaign: Forceful, and even violent, immigration encounters are not rare. In fact, nearly a third of the incidents included in the research involved the use of force or the threat of force.

"You're seeing the threat of using force and actually using it become the default tool for immigration enforcement agents," says Naureen Shah, director of policy and government affairs for immigration at the ACLU and one of the authors of the report.

The analysis included encounters that appeared in news coverage, press releases from schools and hospitals and other locations, and reports from community groups, among others. The nonprofit civil rights organization gathered those accounts and recorded the details of how the enforcement occurred, who was involved and where it happened.

"My first thought is it's a little embarrassing for this information to be gathered, aggregated, analyzed and shared by the ACLU instead of the Department of Homeland Security," says Seth Stoughton, a law professor at the University of South Carolina.

"Living in a democracy means that the government is doing a good job when and only when we the people say it's doing a good job. And that requires a certain degree of transparency about the nature of governmental operations," he added.

How immigration officers use force

The ways officers deployed force varied widely. Researchers documented immigration agents pushing, tackling or pinning people to the ground more than 400 times. They documented officers using weapons – including chemical irritants, rubber bullets and tasers – about as often.

They also found dozens of instances where officers used potentially deadly tactics that many local police agencies restrict or prohibit, including pressing a knee into a person's neck and using chokeholds.

ICE and DHS did not respond to questions about the findings of the report.

Many of the interactions between ICE and the public detailed in the report happened in everyday locations, such as bus stops, grocery stores, and along roads. The ACLU documented hundreds of incidents that involved children, U.S. citizens, protesters, bystanders and journalists.

In the report, researchers stressed that their review included a range of publicly identified federal immigration enforcement activity and was not limited to incidents already alleged to have been unlawful. Conversely, their data is only a snapshot in time across a handful of states. Many immigration operations go unrecorded.

In the year and a half since Trump retook office, ICE has escalated its enforcement efforts with the help of an influx of federal funding, which experts say invites more chances for violent encounters to occur.

"I'm really worried there's going to be even more of these killings," Shah says. "They've got a culture of abuse and impunity where people are under tremendous pressure to fulfill unprecedented arrest quotas, and now they have a practice of using force and intimidation … and then you multiply that by tens of billions of dollars."

An increase in traffic stops

In addition to an uptick in encounters, law enforcement experts also point out that ICE has shifted how its officers are conducting immigration enforcement.

In the past, ICE officers were not out in communities as frequently, and operations were more targeted, says Jillian Snider, a retired New York City police officer and lecturer at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

"When they do their targeted enforcement operations, they generally identify locations that they know there's a wanted person," Snider says. "Now we've seen an increase in doing car stops, which is a big concern if you're not afforded the proper car stop training."

In the case of the two men ICE officers killed this month in Texas and Maine, Lorenzo Salgado Araujo and Joan Durán Guerrero, both were shot in their cars. Neither had been the subject of an ICE targeted operation.

In an earlier statement, DHS said Durán Guerrero had attempted to flee and that the officer, who has not been identified, shot him because he was "fearing for public safety."

In a statement regarding the Texas death, ICE said Salgado Araujo "weaponized his vehicle," though witnesses dispute that account. In both shootings, officers were not wearing body cameras.

"In a situation where you have a car stopped, but there's no imminent threat of deadly physical force or serious physical injury, most agencies will not authorize [the officer] to shoot," says Snider.

In the ACLU report, researchers documented dozens of instances where immigration officers rammed other people's cars, boxed them in and smashed vehicle windows.

"When we see a broad pattern of what appear to be very consistent mistakes – like the way officers are conducting traffic stops or the really poor way they're trying to engage in boxing-in maneuvers, or the way they're rushing up to cars and taking or maintaining positions in a vehicle's path of travel or the way they're very quickly breaking out windows in a way that's likely to encourage someone to flee rather than to comply – that may or may not be a training issue, but it is definitely also a supervision issue," says Stoughton, who is a former police officer. "Why aren't supervisors identifying problematic and counterproductive behaviors and doing something about it?"

This week in Florida, a third person died after being hit by a semi-truck as he fled from ICE officers during a traffic stop.

During a traffic stop, law enforcement experts say officers have to navigate a slew of complex considerations: Is the police car unmarked? Is the driver boxed in? Can the car be put in drive when the door is open? Is anyone else in the vehicle? Has the driver received conflicting instructions? Every choice can factor into how the situation unfolds.

"From what I've seen and what I've seen them do, it doesn't seem like they're familiar with or they really understand how to operate in that type of environment," says Marc Brown, who leads the University of South Carolina's Excellence in Policing and Public Safety Program.

Brown, a former police officer who served as an instructor at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center from 2019 until 2024, says during that time, ICE officers received an "abbreviated version" of defensive tactics, which include the techniques officers can use to de-escalate situations and help them navigate situations like traffic stops.

"You cannot ask your officers to do a different mission and not adjust both your policies and training. You're going to have some significant gaps," Brown says.

After the two shootings, ICE will pause non-urgent traffic stops, though it is unclear how that shift will play out. In a statement, ICE told NPR the agency will not discuss law enforcement tactics, but said it is always evaluating its procedures to keep its officers safe.

In a post on Truth Social Wednesday, President Trump called for ICE traffic stops to continue.

NPR's Sergio Martínez-Beltrán contributed to this report.

Copyright 2026, NPR

A recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowing the Trump administration to move forward with ending Temporary Protected Status for Haitians and Syrians is creating uncertainty for people who have relied on the program to live and work in the United States.

Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, allows people from countries facing armed conflict, natural disasters or other extraordinary conditions to remain in the United States temporarily and receive work authorization.

For people who lose TPS, the consequences can be significant. They may lose protection from deportation and their ability to work legally in the United States unless they qualify for another form of immigration relief.

Ana Pottratz Acosta, an associate professor at Mitchell Hamline School of Law, says the Supreme Court case focused on how courts can review the government’s process for ending TPS protections.

“It limits the ability of courts to do any type of judicial review of the process that was laid out by Congress,” Pottratz Acosta said.

The ruling does not end TPS as a program, but it allows the administration to continue moving forward with ending protections for Haitians and Syrians while legal challenges continue.

Pottratz Acosta says TPS was created as a form of humanitarian protection for people who cannot safely return to their home countries.

“It's intended to grant people protection on humanitarian grounds,” she said.

She says the program allows people to apply for work authorization while their countries are designated for TPS.

There are an estimated 4,000 Haitians who live in Minnesota. For many of them, the administration’s decision to end TPS is personal. Rose Mingo-Holtz is originally from Haiti and has lived in Minnesota for more than three decades. She is the founder, director and teacher at Mes Amis French School in Hopkins.

Mingo-Holtz is a U.S. citizen, but she says TPS affects people she knows and cares about.

“It's devastating. It's devastating because even for me, who wants to go and visit the country, I can't.”

She says she worries about Haitians who may have to return to a country where they could face danger.

“For those who have to go back, and they don't know if they really have a home, or if they are safe, you know, it's really the safety situation,” she said.

Mingo-Holtz says many Haitians who came to the United States were looking for safety and a chance to build a life and people that rely on TPS are not looking for a handout, but an opportunity.

“Their purpose is to try to have the American dream, and what I mean by that is just like everybody else, to make a living.”

Pottratz Acosta says losing TPS does not necessarily mean every person immediately loses the ability to remain in the United States. Some may qualify for other forms of immigration relief but losing TPS removes an important form of protection.

“By losing TPS, it takes away one of those forms of protection. So people are feeling very vulnerable.”

For Mingo-Holtz, TPS represents more than a legal designation. “It's giving them a life to live. I mean, hope, security.”

“I want to make sure that the American people know that this administration, when it comes to Jeffrey Epstein, has been more transparent than any administration,” Blanche said as he confronted questions about his brief but turbulent tenure atop the Justice Department. The Senate hearing will test Trump's grip on Republican lawmakers whose support the nominee will need for the job.

Trump's former personal attorney, Blanche has run the department on an interim basis since April, during which time he has accelerated investigations into Trump foes, functioned as the public face of a maligned fund meant to compensate the Republican president’s allies and alarmed press freedom advocates with an aggressive pursuit of news media leaks.

Those actions will receive fresh scrutiny at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing as Blanche testifies for the opportunity to serve out the duration of Trump's term. The stakes are high given the upheaval inside the department, where mass firings and resignations have hollowed out the workforce. More than 1,200 department alumni have come out against his nomination.

Sen. Dick Durbin, the committee’s top Democrat, told Blanche: “In less than 18 months at the Department of Justice, you’ve shown you’re still President Trump’s personal attorney. Your tenure can be summed up in the four words you said — ‘I love you, sir’ — to President Trump.” That was a reference to remarks Blanche made at an April news conference.

Blanche, for his part, insisted that he has presided over a course correction at the department following years of investigations into Trump during the Biden administration.

“In recent years, we watched the Justice Department turned against many of you and a former president, and it damaged the public's faith in justice,” Blanche argued. “We are fixing that.”

Blanche will need the support of each Republican on the panel

Blanche, who is expected to be uniformly voted down by Democrats on the committee, must win the support of all Republicans on the panel for his nomination to advance.

A particular focus is on Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, who in May lost his primary and has said he won't decide on Blanche's nomination until after the hearing, and Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who has opted not to seek reelection. Tillis has been an outspoken critic of a $1.776 billion fund that the Trump administration created to compensate people who feel unjustly persecuted by the criminal justice system and then quickly withdrew.

Tillis has said he will not support for attorney general anyone who equivocates on the events of Jan 6, 2021, when pro-Trump rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol in a bid to halt the congressional certification of Trump's election loss to Democrat Joe Biden. The senator, however, recently said he doesn’t have any concerns about Blanche’s record regarding the events of that day.

With the death of South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who was a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, there are 11 Republicans and 10 Democrats on the panel. If even one Republican on the committee votes against Blanche, it could scuttle his nomination.

Questions await about the $1.776 billion fund and the Epstein files

The $1.776 billion fund, called the Anti-Weaponization Fund, created a particularly rocky moment for Blanche. He initially defended it during congressional appearances only to reveal later that it was being scrapped — even while resisting calls to give those reassurances in writing. The turnabout followed fierce bipartisan backlash that came to a head during a tense closed-door meeting he had with lawmakers.

The fund arose out of a settlement of Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over his leaked tax returns. The Florida judge overseeing that case issued a scathing ruling that said Trump and his lawyers had manipulated the court system in bringing the lawsuit in the first place. The judge, Kathleen Williams, said Monday she was troubled by Blanche's involvement in the settlement given that he previously represented Trump.

“He’s got a few more questions to get through, after the judge’s decision today,” Cornyn told reporters Monday.

Blanche will also face questioning over a separate element of the settlement that afforded Trump and members of his family protection from tax audits and that, he has said, remains on track despite outrage over it from even Republicans.

Epstein files are also under scrutiny

Other testimony is likely to focus on Blanche's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, especially after his predecessor Pam Bondi told lawmakers behind closed doors after her ouster as attorney general that Blanche was the department’s point person on the release of documents from the sex trafficking case into the late financier.

The staggered release, mandated by an act of Congress, was beset by problems, including redaction errors that left exposed nude photos showing the faces of potential victims. Some names, email addresses and other identifying information were either unredacted or not fully obscured. About 1 percent of the records had redactions that needed to be fixed, he said.

A former federal prosecutor and key member of Trump's defense team as the Republican battled four indictments between his first and second terms, Blanche arrived at the Justice Department last year as deputy attorney general. He then ascended to the top job after Trump ousted Bondi, who had frustrated the White House by struggling to bring successful cases against Trump's political opponents.

Blanche has tried to satisfy the president in that regard. He has appointed a new prosecutor to spearhead a Florida-based investigation centered on former government officials Trump dislikes. The Justice Department under Blanche's watch also secured an indictment of ex-FBI Director James Comey, another adversary of Trump, on charges of threatening the 47th president by posting a social media photograph of seashells in the numerical arrangement of “86 47.” Comey has said he assumed the numbers reflected a political message, not a call to violence.

Blanche has denied accusations that he has been weaponizing the department. But he has also insisted that he sees no problem with the president’s interest in Justice Department matters and that he feels no pressure to placate him.

“We have thousands of ongoing investigations and prosecutions going on in this country right now,” Blanche told a press conference in May. “And it is true that some of them involve men, women and entities that the president in the past has had issues with and believes should be investigated. That is his right, and indeed it is his duty to do that.”

Blanche has also presided over an aggressive enforcement of news media leaks, with prosecutors most recently issuing subpoenas demanding that a group of New York Times journalists testify before a federal grand jury after they reported on security concerns involving the new Qatari-gifted Air Force One. The Times' executive editor, Joseph Kahn, criticized the subpoenas, praised his journalists’ work and said: “We expect to prevail."

President Donald Trump on Wednesday threw his support behind MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell in Minnesota race for governor, giving him a possible boost in a competitive race for the GOP nomination.

In a post on Truth Social, Trump called Lindell “one of America’s greatest and most hard working patriots.”

“Mike will be SPECTACULAR!!! He truly loves Minnesota, as do I, and wants to bring it back from oblivion and embarrassment. He can do it!” Trump wrote.

He referred to Lindell as “the ‘Pillow Man.’”

Lindell has been an ardent supporter of Trump and a vocal backer of the president’s theory that the 2020 election was stolen. Several probes and court cases have found those allegations to be unsubstantiated.

Lindell has often been to Trump's Mar-A-Lago estate in Florida, including a fundraiser there for his Minnesota campaign. The two have kept in close contact over the years.

Lindell told MPR News Trump was the second person he told about his bid for governor, after his wife, and he sought to earn the endorsement based on the prowess of his campaign.

“I didn't ask him for his endorsement then. I wanted to get it based on merit, based on what I could do, and and and so I'm really excited that he he endorsed me today, and it's based on merit that I how I've done with my with the campaign so far,” Lindell said.

Lindell is challenging GOP endorsed candidate Kendall Qualls and Minnesota House Speaker Lisa Demuth, R-Cold Spring, in the Aug. 11 primary.

Qualls responded by noting his continued support for Trump and his agenda.

“This race won’t be won by national endorsements, though; it will be decided by Minnesota Republicans — the same Republicans who supported President Trump in all three of his campaigns —and who time and time again have lined up behind our campaign as the only candidate endorsed by the Minnesota Republican Party,” Qualls said in a written statement.

Demuth issued a pair of statements on Wednesday, with the first saying she’d “unite all corners of the party” but not mentioning Trump’s move. In a later statement, she said she has partnered with Trump on tax cuts and fraud.

“President Trump has put America first, and as governor I will put Minnesota first,” the second Demuth statement concluded. “I am laser focused on winning the Aug. 11 Republican primary, and then defeating Amy Klobuchar and the radical Democrats up and down the ballot in November.”

Minnesota’s Republican Party Chair Alex Plechash issued a statement that criticized Lindell as politically problematic and a candidate who risks dragging down the rest of the ticket.

“When the going got tough under Tim Walz, Mike Lindell left Minnesota for Texas,” Plechash said. “Now he wants Minnesota Republicans to overlook his serious financial baggage, public records showing tens of thousands of dollars in delinquent property taxes, significant electability concerns, and unanswered questions surrounding his running mate.”

Plechash predicted Lindell would come up short in the primary. His statement didn’t mention that Qualls is the party-endorsed candidate.

But the president's seal of approval could sway some Minnesota Republicans. There has been little public polling in the race, but a KSTP poll last month by Survey USA showed Lindell with a slight edge even though many respondents were undecided.

Lindell said the president’s endorsement gives him more confidence heading into the primary matchup.

“Now I can concentrate. I'm not taking the primary for granted, but I want to concentrate now on getting out what I can do for Minnesota,” he said. “This will raise a lot of funding. Right now we're approaching $3 million but this should up that so we can really hit the advertising to the marketing that I have planned to go against Amy Klobuchar.”

U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar is the likely Democratic nominee in the open governor's race.

Republicans haven’t won a statewide race in Minnesota since 2006, when Gov. Tim Pawlenty won a second term in a tight race.

Trump has focused intently on Minnesota in his second term, frequently tangling with DFL Gov. Tim Walz, the Democratic Party’s 2024 vice presidential nominee. He has accused Walz of not doing more to stop fraud and made Minnesota the epicenter of his immigration enforcement campaign.

Progressive group Alliance for a Better Minnesota quickly responded to Trump’s endorsement Wednesday morning, saying Lindell would bring Trump’s “dangerous, harmful agenda to Minnesota.”

“Minnesota conservative governor candidate Mike Lindell is a far-right extremist who has spent years doing Donald Trump’s bidding,” the group’s executive director Marissa Luna said. “Lindell supports Trump’s policies that cut healthcare to give huge tax breaks to the ultra-rich and big corporations, praised Trump’s ICE operation in Minnesota, and has spread baseless election conspiracy theories.”

Adrian Riley has been behind bars since 1996, serving three consecutive life sentences for murders he says he didn’t commit.

Riley has nearly exhausted traditional routes to freedom. He lost on appeal and was recently denied parole by the state clemency board. The board said Riley didn’t take accountability for the crime and the clemency process is not meant for innocence claims.

Minnesota did set up a process to investigate innocence claims, creating a conviction review unit within the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office that started accepting applications in 2021.

For Riley, the creation of the unit was a “godsend.” Hearing it was shutting down this month mid-review of his case was a gut punch.

“I feel like I just got hit by Mike Tyson,” Riley said.

Families of incarcerated people are calling for the reopening of the unit after the attorney general’s office shut it down this month citing lack of funding. They held a press conference at the Minnesota state Capitol on Tuesday demanding the state fully fund the conviction review team.

An outside assessment described the unit’s work as efficient and “a model for how statewide conviction integrity work should be done.” For incarcerated people asserting their innocence and their families, the unit was a lifeline; but they say it needed more resources, not less. Now, with the unit’s closure, the narrow path to exoneration in Minnesota has gotten narrower.

In a statement, Democratic Attorney General Keith Ellison cited “the Trump administration’s refusal to renew federal grant funding that supported the program” as the reason for the unit’s closure.

“No system of justice is perfect, and when ours gets it wrong, we must work to put things right,” Ellison said.

“If the opportunity arises in the future — through renewed funding or other means — I would welcome the chance to resume this important work,” Ellison said. He is running for a third term this year.

The attorney general’s conviction review unit was created after serious questions about the murder conviction of Myon Burrell were raised by the media and state officials. Ultimately, according to Ianna Burrell, her brother’s case wasn’t prioritized by the unit because he was released from prison after his sentence was commuted in 2020.

Since Minnesota’s conviction review unit started receiving applications in spring 2021, more than 1,000 people have applied for consideration. After narrowing down eligible cases, the team completed five investigations and recommended relief for three men. Two were fully exonerated and one was allowed to plead guilty to a lesser charge and be released on time served.

The unit was one of a handful of statewide teams of its kind. The vast majority of conviction review units operate within local jurisdictions like the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office Conviction Integrity Unit, which is now the only conviction review unit in Minnesota.

An outside review heaped praise on the attorney general’s conviction review unit. The report said that from its founding to September 2024, Minnesota’s unit completed five investigations and recommended relief for three people. A survey of six other statewide units concluded that from their founding to December 2023, the teams collectively recommended relief for six people.

But for those hoping their cases would be analyzed by the unit, progress felt slow.

Deaunteze Bobo, 39, is serving life on a conviction for murder charges. Bobo maintains his innocence and said after several years of looking at his case, the conviction review unit told him a final report would come soon.

“Now it's at a halt,” Bobo said, calling from prison on Monday.

“I'm just hoping to get the information that they have about my case so I can continue to proceed with my legal litigations,” Bobo added.

A spokesperson for the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office said in a statement that there were about 160 pending cases when the unit shut down. The written statement added, “there are a small number of cases in which we will be following up with the county attorney and the attorney for the applicant to share our work product.”

Adrian Riley’s case had also been pending. He was seeking another look at a three-decade-old set of convictions.

Riley, now 50, was convicted of the 1995 murders of three people. Riley has asserted another man confessed to the shootings and has sought post-conviction relief multiple times over the years, including requesting DNA and forensic testing, but so far his petitions have been denied.

“I don't know how far did the CRU actually get into my case,” Riley said Monday. “I'm kind of like in limbo.”

At the Tuesday press conference, families of people they say are wrongfully incarcerated called for the state to find a way to fund the attorney general’s conviction review unit.

“We are calling on Minnesota leaders to create permanent state funding solutions that does not disappear when grants end,” said Marvina Haynes.

Haynes’ brother, Marvin Haynes, spent nearly two decades in prison for a murder he maintained he did not commit before being exonerated. This year, lawmakers approved a $4.5 million compensation payment to Haynes for the time he was imprisoned, the largest award of its kind in Minnesota.

“When the conviction review unit was created, many families believed that for the first time, someone inside the system was finally willing to listen to them,” Marvina Haynes said.

“Now that process has been suspended, and, once again, families are left uncertain,” she added.

Haynes’ advocacy for her brother grew into full-time advocacy for other families with incarcerated family members.

“I have families that's standing here today who have been in prison, stating their innocent claim for over 30 years,” Marvina Haynes said. “I ask the question: How much time is too much time for an innocent man? How can this be a funding problem?”

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Tuesday suspended vehicle stops related to immigration enforcement, two sources briefed on the matter said, after agents fatally shot two men six days apart during stops in Texas and Maine.

The policy shift came one day after an ICE officer killed a driver in the coastal Maine town of Biddeford, about 15 miles (24 km) south of Portland.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security released a statement nearly 12 hours after the shooting asserting that the officer, "fearing for public safety," opened fire when the driver attempted to flee agents trying to pull him over.

Officials did not explain how the driver might have posed a threat to the publicor whether that would justify the use of deadly force. According to ICE policy, officers may use deadly force only when there is "imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death to the officer or to another person" and is not authorized "solely to prevent the escape of a fleeing suspect."

While some video footage of the incident's aftermath has emerged, there is not yet any public video showing the moment of the shooting itself. U.S. Senator Angus King, an independent from Maine who caucuses with the Democrats, told reporters that the agents involved were not wearing body cameras, leaving questions unanswered about the circumstances surrounding the shooting.

DHS, the parent agency of ICE, said that the agents were surveilling the last known address of someone with a final order of removal from the country. When someone departed the residence, the officers followed the car, the agency said.

DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin told King that the man killed was not the target of the operation, according to a spokesperson for the senator.

Immigration advocates said the person shot was a 26-year-old Colombian man who was authorized to work in the U.S. The shooting sparked immediate protests on Monday, and further demonstrations were scheduled for Tuesday.

Since the beginning of June, ICE arrests in Maine have more than quadrupled to around 70 per day in early July, according to internal ICE data shared with Reuters by a source.

Monday's killing, along with another last week in Houston, brought to at least seven the number of people shot dead during immigration enforcement operations since January 2025, when President Donald Trump returned to office and launched a campaign of mass deportations.

Asked about the suspension of traffic stops, an ICE spokesperson said, "We are always evaluating our procedures to keep our officers safe and criminals off our streets. We will not disclose or discuss law enforcement tactics."

'I tried to stop'

One witness, Daniel Boucher, 71, a caregiver and part-time draftsman who lives in downtown Biddeford, told Reuters he was on the second floor of his apartment when he heard what sounded like firecrackers on Monday morning.

He rushed to the window and saw a white SUV ram a smaller white car. After running down to street level, and from a vantage point just 20 feet (6 meters) away, Boucher saw an ICE officer emerge from the SUV, open the car's door and pull out the driver, who had blood on his face and head.

"I remember hearing the victim say, 'But I tried to stop,'" Boucher said, before the man appeared to stop breathing.

In a video clip verified by Reuters, the white car appears to meander directionless as two men wearing vests on foot try to stop it, but it was unclear whether the footage was recorded before or after the shooting.

The Maine attorney general's office said it was investigating the shooting alongside local, state and federal authorities.

Houston shooting

The shooting came six days after an ICE agent in Houston's heavily Hispanic East End fatally shot a 52-year-old man, Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, after a traffic stop during an immigration enforcement operation. Salgado was not the target of the operation, a DHS official has said.

ICE said in a statement that Salgado, a Mexican national living in the U.S. illegally for over three decades, rammed a law enforcement vehicle with his van and attempted to run down an officer who fired in self-defense.

The agency offered no evidence to support its account. In similar instances over the past year, initial ICE and DHS statements about the use of force have been contradicted by video footage or other evidence, sometimes in court.

Three men who were riding in Salgado's van have disputed ICE's narrative of the incident, according to a lawyer for two of the men.

Arrests of immigrants have surged in recent weeks, even as the Trump administration has moved away from broad sweeps in Democratic-led cities as part of its crackdown. Those operations were widely criticized as violent and heavy-handed after two U.S. citizens were killed in January by federal agents in Minnesota.

(Reporting by Aleksandra Michalska in Biddeford, Maine, and Kristina Cooke in San Francisco; Additional reporting by Helen Coster; Writing by Joseph Ax; Editing by Paul Thomasch, Alistair Bell and Mark Porter)

Immigrant rights groups are demanding answers and planning more protests Tuesday over an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer's fatal shooting of a Maine driver.

The shooting Monday during an immigration enforcement operation in the city of Biddeford marked the second time in a week that ICE used deadly force and at least the ninth death since President Donald Trump began his immigration crackdown.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security said an ICE officer “fearing for public safety” shot and killed the driver while agents were watching the home of someone they believed was in the country illegally and had a final order of removal from the country.

The department said in a post on X that when ICE tried to stop the vehicle driven by someone coming from the home, the vehicle attempted to flee and the officer fired his weapon.

That statement came hours after Maine Sen. Angus King said Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin told him that the officer opened fire after the man tried to use his vehicle as a weapon against ICE agents.

King said Mullin also told him the officers were trying to serve an arrest warrant, but not for the person who was shot.

The officers involved didn’t have body cameras, leaving many questions surrounding the circumstances of the shooting in the coastal community south of Portland, Maine's biggest city.

It's not clear yet how close the officer was to the vehicle when the officer opened fire, whether officers told the driver to stop or how the public may have been in danger.

DHS did not immediately respond to an email seeking clarity on what led to the shooting.

The Maine attorney general’s office, which is also investigating, said initial statements suggest the motorist was trying to flee in the direction of the agent. The office said the officer who killed him has been placed on leave.

Immigrant rights groups identified the man who was killed as a 26-year-old native of Colombia. The Colombian Embassy said it was in contact with U.S. authorities about the man's death and providing assistance to his family.

Maine's other senator, Republican Susan Collins, said Mullin told her that DHS' Office of Inspector General is investigating in cooperation with the FBI.

Video from a security camera at a nearby business, obtained by The Associated Press, shows a white vehicle approaching an intersection at a modest speed before making several slow circles. A law enforcement SUV blocked its path and two officers open the driver’s door and dragged out a limp body.

It isn't clear from the video when the shots were fired.

Daniel Boucher said he looked out his third-floor window after hearing a “pop, pop, pop” sound. He saw the SUV moving down the street until the SUV hit it.

“His face was bloody. His head was bloody,” Boucher said, getting choked up. “I clearly heard the victim say, ‘I tried to stop.’”

At one point, Boucher said, the agent who shot the man walked close to him.

“I was emotional and I just let him have it, and he looked at me and said, ‘He tried to run me over,’ or something to that effect,” Boucher said. “I don’t remember his exact words.”

Two advocacy groups — the Maine Immigrants’ Rights Coalition and Presente! — said the man who was killed was authorized to work in the U.S.

Mary Hayes, who lives close to the scene, said the man lived nearby with his wife and daughter.

“I watched a wife fall to her knees looking at her husband’s dead body on the ground,” Hayes told the AP as she held a sign saying “No ICE Stop ICE.”

Just last week in Texas, an ICE officer fatally shot 52-year-old Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, of Houston, after federal agents driving unmarked vehicles pursued him while he was taking his construction crew to a job site.

The two shootings come amid a Trump administration push to carry out its mass deportations agenda. Over five days at the end of June, ICE arrested more than 10,000 people.

The figures indicate that while the administration is no longer cracking down on individual cities, arrests are surging. The administration’s enforcement efforts were widely condemned last winter after the killings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good in Minnesota.

The U.S. military announced it will begin its blockade of Iranian ships over the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday, as Iran vowed to assert its own control over the critical international waterway.

U.S. Central Command said the blockade would begin on Tuesday at 4 p.m. ET. The military last worked to block maritime traffic to and from Iranian ports from April 13 to June 18.

The announcement came after an intensified exchange of strikes over the weekend, testing a shaky ceasefire and threatening a return to all-out war in the region.

On Monday, the U.S. launched another wave of strikes on Iran. The U.S. military said it struck Iranian defense systems, missile and drone sites and maritime capabilities to "degrade Iran's ability to attack commercial shipping."

Iran's Revolutionary Guard said Tuesday that it had struck "two non-compliant" supertankers in the Strait of Hormuz, according to a statement in Iranian state media. Iran also said it launched missiles and drones against U.S. military infrastructure in Bahrain, which hosts the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet, and U.S. military outposts in Jordan.

The United Arab Emirates' Defense Ministry said two of its tankers were targeted by Iranian cruise missiles while transiting the shipping lane of the Strait of Hormuz in Omani waters, killing one person. Bahrain authorities reported that sirens were sounded and urged citizens to head to safe places. Jordanian state media said the country's air defenses intercepted four Iranian missiles early Tuesday as they entered its airspace.

The escalation comes as the U.S. and Iran reach a halfway mark in the 60-day ceasefire agreed in June, when the two sides signed a 14-point memorandum of understanding to work out the terms of a final deal and open the Strait of Hormuz.

During a NATO summit in Turkey last week, President Trump declared the ceasefire "over," but didn't rule out further talks.

The truce all but collapsed over the weekend as Iran attacked a commercial vessel moving through the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday and the U.S. retaliated with strikes in response.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told a news conference Monday that Iran was in touch with mediators, including Oman, Qatar and Pakistan, saying their role was to de-escalate the situation.

But the status of negotiations with the U.S. was not clear.

Control over the Strait of Hormuz

Control over the Strait of Hormuz — a key shipping route for oil, gas and other goods — has emerged as the key point of contention between the U.S. and Iran. The deadlock over the waterway, through which roughly 20 percent of the world's energy supplies typically move, has disrupted global trade and increased fuel prices around the world.

This latest wave of strikes from both sides is already having an impact in traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, with Kpler, a data and analytics company that tracks global commodity and shipping markets, saying on Monday that crossings dropped to 22 ships last week — an almost 85 percent decrease from the prewar traffic.

The Strait of Hormuz is considered an international waterway, but since the start of the war on Feb. 28, Tehran has claimed it's in control and has insisted ships get permission and follow approved routes. Iran has been attacking ships if they did not comply with its orders.

Trump pushed back on Monday and said the United States would not allow Iranian ships to move through the strait. "We are reinstating THE IRANIAN BLOCKADE, so named because it is only stopping Iran's ships or customers from entering or leaving," he said in a post online.

Trump said other countries will be able to move through the waterway, but the U.S. will charge a 20 percent toll on cargo as reimbursement for the U.S. doing "the job of providing safety and security to this very volatile section of the World."

The U.S. will be known as "THE GUARDIAN OF THE HORMUZ STRAIT," he wrote.

Until now, the U.S. had said there should not be any tolls or fees on shipping through the strait.

CENTCOM did not mention fees but said mariners approaching the Gulf of Oman and Strait of Hormuz should "contact U.S. naval forces on bridge-to-bridge channel 16." It said, "Additional information will be provided to commercial mariners through a formal notice."

Iran's foreign minister responded to Trump's announcement, saying he was correct to note that providing safe passage should be compensated. But he wrote on social media, "Iran has always been the GUARDIAN of the Strait and will remain so FOREVER."

Araghchi then appeared to haggle with Trump: "20% is of course too much. We will be fair," he wrote.

Iranian leaders have been defiant that Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz, despite the Trump administration's claims.

Different interpretations of the memorandum of understanding

Critics of the interim deal signed last month between Iran and the United States blame the lack of details in the agreement for the confusion over the management of the strait that led to renewed fighting.

Michael Singh, a Mideast specialist and the managing director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, says that one such example is Paragraph 5 of the memorandum of understanding, which stipulates that Iran would make arrangements using its "best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vehicles." Singh says the Trump administration and Iranian leaders differ in their interpretation of that commitment, with Iran considering it controls the strait.

"Here, I think the wording, you know, hews much more to what Iran wanted to get out of that understanding because it seems to place responsibility for the straits in Iran's hands rather than reinforcing that this is an international waterway," Singh adds.

Prior to its announcement of the reinstatement of its blockade of Iranian ships over the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S. had urged ships to use a southern route that hugs the coast of Oman. Iran said this violated the memorandum of understanding.

Iran's Parliament speaker and negotiator with the U.S., Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, posted an image of the preliminary deal on social media, highlighting the section of Point 5 that says "Iran will make arrangements." He wrote: "The era of one-sided deals is OVER."

The U.S. has also accused Iran of breaching the memorandum.

The foreign minister of Qatar — a mediator in the conflict — had said ceasefire talks would continue after the multiday funeral last week for Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The ayatollah was killed in U.S.-Israeli airstrikes at the start of the war in late February.

NPR's Jackie Northam and Hadeel Al-Shalchi in Istanbul contributed reporting.

Copyright 2026, NPR

South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster says he is appointing Darline Graham Nordone to finish the term of her late brother, former Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who died in office Saturday at age 71.

That appointment will last just a few months. Graham was up for reelection this year, and won his Republican primary just last month. Republicans who want to vie for the full term starting next year will run in a special primary election Aug. 11.

It is not clear if Graham intends to seek a full term in the Senate to succeed her brother.

"Lindsey has always been there for me and now I will be there for him," Graham said at a press conference on Monday. "It is such a privilege to finish some of his important work."

In the day after Graham's unexpected death, top Republicans seemed to quickly coalesce around elevating his sister for the seat. President Trump recommended her in a post on social media writing, "This would be a fabulous tribute to Lindsey, who loved her dearly!"

Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., also blessed the choice and appeared alongside Graham at a press conference as McMaster made the announcement.

The Graham siblings had a close relationship forged by the death of their parents just over a year apart. Lindsey was in college and Darline was 13. The elder Graham became his sister's guardian and later adopted her so she could receive his benefits from his service as a lawyer in the Air Force.

"I can remember the day my father passed away standing in the living room of that house absolutely scared to death," Graham told NPR in 2015. "Lindsey wrapped his arms around me and promised me he would always be there for me and always take care of me."

Even if Graham is swiftly sworn in, her brother's death could still complicate action in the Senate. He chaired the budget committee, which would be responsible for setting up the process for a third party-line budget reconciliation bill. He also served on the judiciary committee, which is now weighing Trump's nomination for attorney general, Todd Blanche.

Several South Carolina Republicans have indicated an interest in running for a full-term, including Reps. Nancy Mace and Ralph Norman.

Copyright 2026, NPR

Sen. Lindsey Graham, one of President Donald Trump's closest allies in Congress who traveled the globe to advocate for a more aggressive U.S. foreign policy, has died after a “brief and sudden illness,” his office said. He was 71.

The statement posted on social media late Saturday did not provide any additional details about the South Carolina Republican, a former Air Force lawyer, and said his family “appreciates prayers at this time and asks for privacy during this incredibly difficult period.”

“Senator Lindsey Graham, one of the greatest people and Senators I have ever known, is dead!” Trump posted on social media early Sunday. “He was always working, and was a true American Patriot. Lindsey will be greatly missed!!! DETAILS AND ARRANGEMENTS TO FOLLOW. So sad!”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said “my heart is heavy this morning to learn the passing of my friend and colleague."

Thune said Graham was "a strong advocate for the United States and a strong ally to freedom-loving countries across the globe. He believed in the might of America to achieve good in the world and dedicated his life to advancing that cause.”

Graham was one of the most influential figures in Washington on foreign policy, and he advised Trump on matters such as Iran and Russia. The senator had just returned from Ukraine and announced an agreement on Friday with the Trump administration to move forward on a package of Russia sanctions. He had been scheduled to appear on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday morning.

As chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Graham had a central role during Trump’s second term as Republicans pushed major legislation on party-line votes while holding a narrow 53-47 majority in the chamber.

Under South Carolina law, Republican Gov. Henry McMaster will appoint a temporary replacement for Graham, who was seeking a fifth term in November.

Graham was close with Trump

Graham, who was elected to the Senate in 2002 after serving in the House, long promoted a policy of robust U.S. military interventionism and strong national defense that in later years would put him at odds with the growing isolationist wing of the Republican Party.

More recently, Graham had become well-known for his close ties with Trump, whom the senator briefly ran against for the party's presidential nomination in 2016.

Their relationship would begin on a rough note, with Graham calling the then-New York businessman “unfit for office.” Graham also used a profanity to describe Trump after Trump made disparaging comments about Arizona Republican John McCain, Graham's best friend in the Senate and a Vietnam War veteran. McCain and Graham, along with Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., were known as the “Three Amigos” and frequently traveled together to push their hawkish foreign policy views around the globe.

During a campaign rally in South Carolina, Trump read out Graham’s personal cellphone number and continued to belittle him throughout the 2016 campaign as Graham made it clear he would not support Trump, even though he was the nominee.

But Graham shifted significantly once Trump won the White House. He emerged as one of Trump's top allies — speaking with him frequently and becoming a regular presence on the golf course alongside the president — even as McCain remained a critic.

In a 2018 interview with The Associated Press, Graham explained his pivot by saying McCain taught him that the country must move forward after elections and that meant “you have an obligation” to help the president. McCain ran twice for the White House.

“And I’ve tried to be helpful where I could because I think he needs all the help he can get,” Graham said of Trump. “You can be a better critic when people understand that you’re trying to help them be successful.”

Graham appeared to break with Trump after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, saying, “Count me out. Enough is enough." But the senator returned to the fold and remained close with the president during his second term.

Foreign policy was a focus for Graham

Graham had been in Ukraine to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who said that the senator visited his country 10 times during the years since Russia's full-scale invasion.

“Lindsey was a true defender of freedom and the values that make our world safer,” Zelenskyy said.

Graham's travels made him a familiar face to dozens of world leaders.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu mourned Graham’s death, calling him “a great friend of Israel” and “a cherished friend of mine.”

Netanyahu said Graham understood that the security of Israel and the United States was inseparable and devoted his life to defending America, strengthening the U.S.-Israel alliance and standing up for the free world.

“Israel has lost one of its greatest friends. America has lost a great patriot. I have lost a beloved friend,” Netanyahu said.

Graham was chairman of Senate Budget, Judiciary committees

As chairman of the Budget panel, Graham's committee oversaw a process called reconciliation, a Senate procedure that allowed Republicans to pass significant policies such as last year’s tax law without the threat of a Democratic filibuster.

He had previously led the Senate Judiciary Committee when Republicans confirmed Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court in 2020, and was in line to regain that gavel if the party kept control of the Senate after the midterms elections.

“In 2027, I’ll be Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee once again,” Graham posted on X on June 30. “And I’ll wake up every single day with one goal: confirming as many conservative judges as possible.”

Graham was a key player in the Senate’s efforts to craft a massive immigration overhaul in 2013 as a member of a bipartisan group that wrote a sweeping measure that would have altered virtually every part of U.S. immigration law. It passed the Senate with 68 votes but was never taken up by the House, so it did not become law.

But Graham’s views on immigration, particularly an endorsement of a path to citizenship for people in the U.S. without legal status, put him at odds with some Republican factions.

He sometimes faced primary challenges in his home state of South Carolina, but he won the nomination outright in June.

The senator addressed the president in his victory speech last month, saying, “I’m going to help you change this world and change this country.”

Special election to replace Graham could be within weeks

Graham won 57% of the GOP vote in the primary and was up against Democrat Annie Andrews, a pediatrician, and several minor party and independent candidates in November.

After McMaster appoints a replacement, South Carolina law requires a special primary for voters to select a new nominee within weeks of a vacancy. The general election winner will take office January, beginning a full six-year term.

McMaster’s office did not immediately return messages seeking comment on who would take Graham’s seat or when the machinations for the primary would begin. State party officials said early Sunday they would release more information when they could.

The sparse statement by Graham's office, which did not explain his death, comes during a stretch of concern about a lack of transparency about lawmakers’ health.

Rep. Tom Kean Jr., R-N.J., was absent without explanation for months before returning to Congress and disclosing that he had been diagnosed with depression.

Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell, the former longtime Republican leader, was hospitalized weeks ago for undisclosed health reasons.

McMaster said in a statement that Graham was “irreplaceable."

“The fiercest of fighters for South Carolina and America — and a loyal and steadfast friend,” McMaster said. He added: “We shall not see his likes again.”

Graham was not married and did not have children. His closest living relative is sister Darline Graham Nordone, whom he helped raise after both their parents died.

Faced with sharply rising premiums and the loss of key tax credit that helped many afford the coverage, about 17,000 Minnesotans this year have dropped the MNsure health insurance coverage they had previously purchased through the state’s Affordable Care Act marketplace.

MNsure, Minnesota’s marketplace for Affordable Care Act insurance, announced recently that 125,700 Minnesotans were enrolled in one of its health insurance plans as of May 2026. That’s down 12 percent from the 142,977 people who were enrolled in May of last year. And MNsure officials say the trend of people dropping their insurance plans will likely continue.

MNsure provides health insurance plans for people who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid, but don’t have access to employer provided health insurance plans. The drop in enrollment comes at a time when insurance premiums are skyrocketing and after a valuable federal tax credit that helped offset the cost of the policies expired.

Denise Robertson of Health Access MN, a MNsure partner dedicating to helping Minnesotans enroll in and use the health plan, said that her team had been preparing for a mass departure like this ever since they found out the tax credit wouldn’t be extended.

“We were dreading the open enrollment season at the time, having to deliver the bad news that people who had been receiving a tax credit for the past several years wouldn't be able to again,” Robertson recalled. “A lot of those folks just simply couldn't afford to pay a full price policy, and so they're just going out without health insurance.”

The tax credit was adopted in 2021 to help offset the cost of insurance premiums and make the health care coverage more affordable, but Republicans in Congress ended that benefit for anyone who makes more than 400 percent of the federal poverty level, which is $63,840 per year for individuals, and $132,000 a year for a family of four. The tax credit was eliminated in the legislation President Donald Trump called his “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.”

Democrats in Congress tried but failed to extend the tax credits last fall. It was one of the issues in a budget stalemate that led to the longest federal government shutdown in history.

At the same time, insurance premiums for health care plans under the Affordable Care Act have continued to go up significantly. A report by health policy nonprofit KFF found that in 2026, monthly premium payments for enrollees in the U.S. increased on average by a whopping 58 percent, while health insurance plan deductibles increased by 37 percent, and now stands at a record high of $3,786 on average.

The jump in cost is particularly acute in southern Minnesota, partly because of Mayo Clinic’s dominance in the region. Robertson said in Rochester, for example, a person with MNsure who lost out on the tax credit this year could have seen their premiums nearly quadruple in the past year.

Robertson said fewer Minnesotans can afford to keep the health insurance they previously bought on the marketplace. And that’s true across the country. KFF reported that enrollment nationwide could fall by about five million people this year, to about 17.5 million people in 2026, and possibly to as low as 16.5 million. A year ago, 22.3 million were enrolled in ACA health insurance policies.

Robertson said some of her clients are forgoing health insurance all together, while others are staying on, but switching to a plan with a higher deductible, or they are looking for work to get coverage through an employer. She said that some people have cobbled together a mix of other options — like buying short-term policies with limited coverage or even joining subscription programs, in which people pay a monthly fee to a health care provider to get basic primary care services.

Robertson stressed that she’s concerned about the rising costs and drop off in enrollment from a moral perspective — as she considers health care to be a basic human right — but she also clarified the financial ramifications.

When people don’t have access to health insurance, emergency rooms become more crowded and the cost of uncompensated care keeps growing, and inevitably the cost of carrying for a sicker society falls to the taxpayers and leads to higher premiums.

“I wish people understood that this isn't just a problem for the people who have to forgo health insurance,” Robertson said. “It's not just their problem. It's the rest of ours because the rest of the healthcare system picks up the costs.”

A National Guard deployment to the nation's capital has ballooned during the celebrations of the country's 250th anniversary of independence, bolstered in part by contingents from Democratic-led states.

That participation has sparked anger among some in Washington who say the troops are not just there to assist in securing the festivities but are being drawn into the Trump administration's ongoing, open-ended Guard deployment to the city.

A contingent from Minnesota sent for the 250th is set to depart early. On Tuesday, a coalition of think tanks and civic, labor and civil rights groups asked Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer to withdraw the state's National Guard forces, saying they have been misused.

“Previous presidents have requested assistance from out-of-state Guard forces during major events in D.C., and such requests would normally give little cause for concern," the groups said in a letter. "But there is nothing normal about the way President (Donald) Trump has used National Guard forces in the nation’s capital.”

The National Guard has been deployed since last summer

The presence of National Guard members in Washington, D.C., has been contentious since August 2025, when Trump issued an emergency order because of what he said was out-of-control crime.

The local National Guard was activated and deployed to the streets, along with hundreds of federal law enforcement officers and agents. Trump also took control, briefly, of the local police department. States, all led by Republican governors, sent members of their Guard forces, as well.

Over the months, Guard members have responded to medical emergencies, assisted with arrests, helped local police enforce the city’s juvenile curfew and carried out beautification projects. The D.C. Guard helped with snow removal during a major storm in January.

While the deployment stayed consistently in the 2,300 to 2,600 range, in recent weeks the numbers increased to around 5,000 as part of the security plan for the Great American State Fair, the fireworks display on July 4 and other crowd-intensive events.

Democratic-led states were part of that surge, and their troops were originally expected to remain for weeks. Michigan sent roughly 160 troops. Minnesota sent just over 100. Both of those states have joined other Democratic-led states in supporting a lawsuit challenging the ongoing deployment to the city.

Activists say Guard members seen far from 250th events

Keya Chatterjee, executive director of Free DC, a group dedicated to achieving statehood for the District of Columbia and one of the organizations signing Tuesday's letter, said her organization has seen Michigan Guard members near metro stops and in neighborhoods “far from the Mall" despite a threat from Whitmer to pull them out.

Free DC has organized a network of people to monitor and chronicle overall Guard activities in the city. It protested at an event last week hosted by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth meant to thank the Guard troops for their service in securing the city.

Officials there, including acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and top White House adviser Stephen Miller, spoke to the troops both about the crime in the city as well as security preparations for the 250 celebrations.

“It’s a righteous and beautiful mission,” Hegseth said.

The Pentagon referred questions to the Joint Task Force-District of Columbia. which did not respond to a series of questions on the deployments.

Chatterjee told The Associated Press that the Democratic governors who had sent personnel to the city were “pretending they don’t know" that their Guard members could be used as part of the Safe and Beautiful Task Force, established through a presidential executive order last year and said to be fighting crime in the city.

Minnesota ends deployment early as Michigan weighs next steps

Minnesota is set to withdraw its Guard members Saturday, earlier than the planned July 23 return.

In a statement, Air Force Maj. Nathan Wallin, deputy state public affairs officer for the Minnesota National Guard, attributed that to “the successful conclusion of festivities” and made no mention of activists' concerns.

A lone Kentucky Guard member was brought home before the main events began after being diverted to the task force “without the knowledge or consent” of the state's governor or its Guard command, said Scottie Ellis, Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear's communications director.

Michigan's deployment is due to continue through Aug. 31. But Whitmer has threatened to end it if there are more reports of the Michigan Guard being used in the ongoing law enforcement deployment. In a letter last week to the commanding general of the state's National Guard, she asked that the Guard's duties be limited to the 250 celebrations.

“I have not deployed — and will not deploy — the Michigan National Guard to support the D.C. Safe and Beautiful Mission,” she wrote.

Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of Liberty and National Security at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law and a signatory to the letter to Whitmer, said the governors of the Democratic states that sent Guard members were placing their trust in the administration to limit the use of their guard forces.

“They are trying to make a distinction here between what their Guard forces are doing in D.C.,” she said. “The problem is the administration is not making that distinction — and cannot be trusted.”

Sign up for alerts on breaking news and exclusive reporting from NPR

Democrats in Congress hailed it as the biggest housing bill in decades. Republicans called it a win for families across the country. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt described it on X as "one of the most significant pieces of housing legislation in American history." And in June, both houses of Congress passed it with broad bipartisan support.

President Donald Trump called it "a big yawn" and refused to sign it on June 24, shortly after it passed.

On Truth Social that month, Trump dismissed the bill — officially called the 21st Century Road to Housing Act — as "of minor importance" and canceled a White House signing ceremony, stipulating that he would only sign if Congress passed a strict voter ID bill called the SAVE America Act. That bill would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo ID to cast a ballot. It has stalled in the Senate, where it doesn't have the 60 votes to pass.

"To me, compared to the SAVE America Act, just about everything is a big yawn," Trump told reporters in June.

Then on Friday morning, Trump doubled down on that refusal, posting on Truth Social: "I will not sign the Housing Bill, which has been fully approved by Congress and sent to the White House, in PROTEST over the fact that the United States Senate is not capable of passing THE SAVE AMERICA ACT."

When reached for comment, the White House referred NPR to the president's post.

But a bill can become law even without the president's signature, and the clock had already started ticking on June 29, when House Speaker Mike Johnson delivered the legislation to Trump for either a signature or veto. That 10-day clock was set to expire at 11:59 p.m. ET Friday. Without action from the president, the bill would become law automatically.

That's how, at the stroke of midnight, the bill became law without Trump's signature.

The housing law aims to make homeownership more affordable, primarily by encouraging homebuilding across the country.

It's packed with more than 40 provisions, contributed by both Republicans and Democrats, on everything from corporate home ownership to manufactured home construction, which helps explain why it passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.

So does lawmakers' recognition that home prices have skyrocketed past what many families can afford. According to Realtor.com, a household making $75,000 a year can afford fewer than a quarter of the home listings available.

Housing affordability is a potent electoral issue, and both parties are hoping to claim credit for passing legislation meant to address it ahead of the midterms.

What's in the housing law?

Despite Trump downplaying the law, it includes an idea he promoted: capping how many single-family homes big investors can buy. The law says corporate landlords that own at least 350 houses won't be able to buy more. The goal is to make the housing market more competitive for individual buyers, who are often outbid by investors who can make all-cash offers.

Some Democratic lawmakers had long supported such a ban; Republicans were more skeptical until Trump backed the idea. Still, House Republicans did quash part of the ban that would have required developers of build-to-rent homes to sell off those rentals after seven years.

It's not clear yet how much of a change this cap will make on the housing market. Nationally, these large investors only own about 3% of the single-family rental market, although private equity owns a much larger slice of the real estate in some cities and neighborhoods.

Researchers at the government-backed housing finance company Freddie Mac say private equity is only a small driver of the housing shortage, since they typically buy up cheap homes in need of significant repair. And staff at both the left-leaning Urban Institute and right-leaning Taxpayers Protection Alliance argue private equity can actually improve the housing shortage by renovating homes that would have otherwise fallen out of the market.

Other provisions are meant to boost homebuilding, such as by allowing developers to skip an environmental review if a house is going up between two buildings that were already reviewed.

Another provision creates a grant program communities can use to develop "pattern books," a collection of preapproved housing designs that would need fewer approvals before construction.

Manufactured homes, which are generally cheaper than homes built on site, also get a break. The law removes a requirement that they have a permanent chassis, a steel frame that makes those homes movable. Housing policy experts say that could save $5,000 to $10,000 in construction costs per home and make more elaborate designs, such as a second story, easier to build.

And while the law doesn't add any new housing funding to the federal budget, it's designed to encourage home construction by sending more of the existing funding to communities that build more.

The limits of the housing law

Decisions in Washington typically have less influence on housing markets than those made within the halls of local government or a private developer's office.

Local zoning rules can slow down or prohibit construction — and the federal law doesn't make changes to those rules. Homebuilders may choose to not pick up their hammers if market conditions aren't right, and developers have been pessimistic about those conditions for the last three years, partially due to high material and labor costs.

And Congress doesn't control mortgage rates, another important factor in housing affordability. Rates for a 30-year fixed mortgage are currently around 6.5% on average, much higher than they were a few years ago during the pandemic.

Even if builders start new development projects, additional homes will take time to hit the market and any affordability improvements won't be felt for years, according to Sarah Brundage, president of the National Association of Affordable Housing Lenders. She said this also explains why Congress hasn't bothered with housing legislation for so long: A single development — from construction start to market — can take longer than an elected official's term.

But Brundage said housing affordability has reached the point where lawmakers can no longer do nothing. In June, the median existing home cost $440,600. And while local reform needs to happen, Brundage said, the federal law is a needed first step.

"We have to take the time to celebrate that we have bipartisan champions," Brundage said. "Moving forward in 2028 and beyond, I don't think anyone can run for public office without having a perspective of how housing needs to be prioritized."

Copyright 2026, NPR

A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer fatally shot Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a Mexican national who lived in the U.S. for decades, as the homebuilder drove his construction crew to a Houston job site.

His death set off protests in Texas' largest city and calls from Democrats and Salgado Araujo 's family for an independent investigation. The shooting on Tuesday in a heavily Hispanic neighborhood is at least the eighth death during the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement campaign.

The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, said federal officers were looking for someone they had targeted weeks before when they attempted to stop a vehicle driven by Salgado Araujo. In a statement, DHS said Salgado Araujo rammed an ICE vehicle and that a federal officer fired a weapon in self-defense.

Salgado Araujo’s family said he had nearly finished the long process of obtaining legal status in the U.S. after living in the country for 35 years, and that he knew what to do if approached by ICE officers. Ronaldo Salgado, his son, said his father may have been scared that the people in unmarked vehicles were coming to steal his work tools.

Here’s what we know about Salgado Araujo’s shooting:

The shooting happened on a Houston street

Few photos or video surrounding the shooting in Houston have emerged on social media, unlike other deaths involving federal immigration officers.

DHS said weeks before the shooting, agents investigating a tip saw two white vans at the address of a target. While heading to that address Tuesday, officers saw a white van and someone inside who resembled the person they were looking for, the department said in a statement.

DHS said an officer opened fire after Salgado Araujo ignored commands and attempted to ram the officer with his vehicle. The agency has not released any video or photos.

A video shot by bystander Juliet Martinez shows the aftermath of the shooting. A black vehicle is angled toward a white van, their doors wide open. A bleeding and handcuffed man groans loudly on the ground and his leg shakes. Other federal officers stand over at least three other handcuffed men.

ICE has not released the names of the other men detained, but Salgado Araujo’s family identified one as his brother. Families of the other two men said they were able to briefly talk to them Wednesday and they are being detained.

ICE said Thursday that the officers involved in the shooting were not wearing body cameras. They have not said if agents were specifically targeting Salgado Araujo or whether the officers involved are on leave.

Salgado Araujo's family says he worked hard for the American dream

Salgado Araujo and his wife came to America after meeting in their teens in Mexico and deciding they wanted a better life for their future family, Ronaldo Salgado said.

The father of three built houses in the Houston suburbs, started his own business and established his own crew. He had no criminal record, his family said.

Ronaldo Salgado, the oldest son, became a teacher. He said one of his brothers is an engineer and the other is studying engineering in college.

His son said he was a quiet man who left for work at sunrise and loved to pet his dog and sit on his porch listening to music.

“That’s how I want the world to know my father. Not as someone who got shot and killed, but as a family man, a man who understood that good things come to those who put in hard work,” Salgado said.

At least 8 deaths so far in the immigration crackdown

Salgado Araujo was at least the eighth person to die during the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement campaign. No immigration officers have been charged in the deaths and video footage in several previous shootings contradicts the accounts of federal officers.

The most well-known of the killings happened during the winter crackdown in Minnesota where U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti were shot and killed during protests.

Two other shooting deaths happened during traffic stops, including Ruben Ray Martinez, 23, who was killed in Texas in March 2025. His death was not disclosed for nearly a year.

Mexico wants criminal charges over deaths of its citizens

President Claudia Sheinbaum said it is time to escalate Mexico's complaints beyond diplomatic channels after the killing of Salgado Araujo.

“We are going to do everything in our power, because we cannot stand silent” in the face of the deaths of Mexicans “whose only crime is working honestly in the United States,” Sheinbaum said.

Mexico will request that criminal charges be filed in U.S. courts over the alleged killing of three Mexicans during ICE operations and the deaths of another 14 in ICE custody, Foreign Minister Roberto Velasco said Thursday during a presidential press conference.

The complaints, filed against whoever is found responsible for the deaths, will be submitted to state prosecutor offices and the U.S. Department of Justice.

DHS is investigating the shooting

Homeland Security said Tuesday that the department's Inspector General’s office was investigating the shooting.

Harris County District Attorney Sean Teare said Salgado Araujo’s family and the community deserve the truth. His office said Thursday that they are "pursuing investigative avenues available to us and will conduct a review of any information we collect within our reach.”

Houston Mayor John Whitmire said city police were not involved in any part of the chase or shooting and have no jurisdiction over federal officers.

Anyone who has ever shown a slight interest in politics might be watching their email inbox fill up with pleas for money. Political fundraising emails are out in full force with urgent appeals to shake loose small-dollar donations.

They go to people who perhaps signed up for updates from a political candidate, visited a campaign website or previously donated to a political cause.

The subject lines stand out:

"Please read before deleting."

"We really need your help"

"Trump said WHAT?!"

And it’s not just from candidates the email recipient has previously supported. A Minnesota voter might get hit up by campaigns in Texas, California or Florida.

Welcome to the world of political fundraising emails.

The emails are personalized. Sometimes pleading or desperate. Or from time-to-time they are shaming. They can be manipulative or look like a phishing attempt.

"We've reached out to you time and time again — will you PLEASE respond?"

"Action required: your voter profile needs immediate verification."

"Leadership chose YOU, Patriot. Don't let them down."

"IMPORTANT SOCIAL SECURITY ANNOUNCEMENT"

“They are a cost-effective way to reach out to voters, particularly small donors who might be inspired to contribute even small amounts to political campaigns,” said Costas Panagopoulos, a distinguished professor at Northeastern University who studies political campaigns.

“Small contributions, which is typically what's solicited using these email tactics, are becoming increasingly important for political campaigns and constitute a larger and growing share of political contributions,” he said.

Those donations are important for any campaign. But for one like Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, they’re essential. She stresses how she's refusing corporate-linked political action committee money for her Senate campaign.

“So it is folks who, you know, are donating $5, $10, $25,” Flanagan said. “And you know that means that once people contribute, they are absolutely invested in this campaign.”

Flanagan said she's had more than 75,000 donors to her campaign. Panagopoulos said the small donations are a measure of a campaign's reach.

“It's not just the total amount of money that campaigns are raising, but the total number of contributions that becomes a proxy for their level of support in the electorate,” he said.

Email fundraising brings about $360 million a year into political campaigns, said Eric Wilson, the executive director for The Center for Campaign Innovation. The organization helps conservative candidates better use technology in their campaigns. Wilson worked on several campaigns and was the digital director for Marco Rubio's 2016 presidential bid.

Campaigns build their own lists of potential donors and might also buy email lists from past campaigns or political list brokers. That's why donors find that once they give to one candidate, they're suddenly getting messages from others.

"The best indication of a future behavior is past behavior, and so if someone has donated in the past, they're very likely to donate again in the future,” Wilson said. “And so campaigns want to be sending emails to those people.”

Those lists and the labor for email fundraisers can add up. Wilson said that typically it will cost $38 to raise $100. To get the most out of those potential donors, campaigns will email often — in part to get through spam filters — and they'll use different strategies to get the recipient to click.

Erika Franklin Fowler, a professor of government at Wesleyan University and the director of the Wesleyan Media Project, which studies campaign advertising, said the tactics usually fall into two categories.

One is fear appeals.

“You know this is your last chance, or we really need this, or something bad will happen,” Fowler said.

Another is social desirability.

“Fear of being singled out, sort of that ‘Your neighbors are doing it; you haven't’ social pressure,” Fowler said.

Some go further, looking like a personalized email. Or warning you're in danger of getting behind on a bill.

While many might find getting these emails annoying, Wilson said there's not much evidence that it backfires.

“Campaigns and their operatives would not be sending them out if they weren't effective,” Wilson said.

With the midterms election still months out, the email barrage won't end anytime soon.

As they compete for the GOP nomination in an August primary, Minnesota's Republican governor candidates are promising to slash state spending. They’ve committed to hefty tax cuts, too.

With financial constraints and, for now, a closely divided Legislature, those budget-related ambitions could be easier said than done.

Not long after former healthcare executive Kendall Qualls locked down the Republican Party’s endorsement for governor, he pledged a massive tax cut if he wins the race.

“Under my administration, we’ll deliver a $9 billion fraud rebate,” Qualls said in a June campaign video, citing a former federal prosecutor’s figure about potential fraud over almost a decade. Criminal cases so far have not alleged that level of loss.

In explaining his plan, Qualls told MPR News that the tax cut would come in parts — rebates in each year of a two-year state budget. Qualls said he would pay for it by making vast spending cuts and seeking other cost savings.

“We're looking at a 12 percent budget decrease across the board, and you could manage that with little to no impact at all when you think about operating state budgets,” he said.

Minnesota’s current two-year budget is about $71 billion, with a potential deficit brewing because of a mismatch in revenue and spending.

Qualls isn’t alone in saying he’d cut state spending. Republican House Speaker Lisa Demuth said she’d do it, too — and stresses she has already done it as part of negotiations in the narrowly split Legislature.

“When we set the budget going forward, we reduced state spending by $5 billion,” Demuth said at a recent campaign press conference at the Capitol. “We look forward to doing even more.”

Minnesota’s overall budget size did fall between the budget before she became speaker and the one after. Some of that resulted from the expiration of one-time spending made when DFL lawmakers had a sizable but mostly temporary surplus in the prior budget.

Demuth said there are other areas that could be pared back.

“The first way we will do that is ending fraud and cutting back and right-sizing the government,” Demuth said.

She contends that too many state employees have been added under Gov. Tim Walz’s administration.

“There's been an explosion of new FTEs and growth within government in a way that Minnesotans and their family budgets have not experienced, and we look forward to doing further reductions as appropriate,” she said.

Her campaign website says she’d deliver income tax cuts, exempt Social Security benefits from taxes and lower vehicle registration fees along the way.

MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell said he’s working on a budget proposal that would streamline state spending. In an interview, he said he would size up programs one-by-one and turn to the private sector for more help funding them.

Lindell also said he’d bring in a state department of government efficiency. He’s modeling it after the DOGE project put in place when President Donald Trump returned to the White House.

"I want to make sure the people that are entitled to it, that need the funds, that need the help, get the help, but it's the right help, and it gets to the root of the problem, rather than just enabling,” Lindell said. “Or a program that just doesn't end, and you don't help the person, you know, the people that need the help.”

He isn’t committing to a firm number in cuts. The former cocaine addict who has since worked in addiction recovery programs said some state programs might need more funding, not less.

“I'm not just going to be a politician that says, ‘I'm going to cut spending, so you're going to save on your taxes,’” Lindell said. “This is all it is like a huge business. You can't hurt someone over here to gain over here.”

Democrats say voters deserve specific details about what the GOP-set cut goals would mean.

The Alliance for a Better Minnesota, a Democratic-aligned group that has traditionally been a big player in races for governor, used the Qualls comments about across-the-board cuts as an opening to connect the GOP candidates to healthcare scaleback approved under Trump.

“What programs is Qualls planning to cut, and how will this affect our families?” asked Marissa Luna, the alliance’s executive director.

The campaign for Amy Klobuchar, a current U.S. senator and the likely DFL nominee for governor, pointed to her plans to make government “more effective, innovative and accountable.” She put out a plan in May to taken on fraud and perform a top-to-bottom audit of state programs to end those that are duplicative or ineffective. But, the campaign said in a written statement, that she would put money toward raising achievement in schools and easing costs of healthcare and housing.

Officials who helped craft previous state budgets say it’s easier to make campaign promises about spending cuts than it is to make them stick.

“It's hard work, and that's why being governor and leading agencies is tough stuff,” said Jim Schowalter, who served in state budget roles under Govs. Tim Pawlenty, Mark Dayton and Tim Walz. “The first idea may make some sense, and it may sound good, but then you start to understand that there's complications or impacts, or there's real people losing out on a decision.”

Tom Hanson, a former commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget under Pawlenty, said budget cuts are challenging, especially when they’re not being made to fill a budget hole.

“It's pretty tough to find money to cut without directly impacting something that somebody gets,” Hanson said. “You're essentially showing that, well, instead of spending money on A, B and C, I'm going to spend it on D, E, and F. And you’ve got to make the case, and that isn't always easy.”

He said that boils down to making a successful pitch to state lawmakers — who would need to pass a budget — and to the public.

Hanson said there’s a new factor at play in budget debates this time around: fraud. And that might make it easier to pitch Minnesotans on potential cuts.

“Nobody likes to pay money into something that isn't being used properly,” Hanson said. “I think that's a dynamic that we have not seen in budgeting.”

MPR News correspondent Peter Cox contributed to this report.

Somali American and Muslim community members in Minnesota are raising concerns about safety and Islamophobia after President Donald Trump posted a video showing children at a St. Paul kindergarten graduation ceremony. It included several young girls wearing hijabs. And its caption was from an account called “End Wokeness.” It said, “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab… in kindergarten.”

Somali community leaders gathered for a press conference to condemn the post.

Imam Yusuf Abdulle, executive director of the Islamic Association of North America, joined MPR News guest host Catharine Richert to talk about the press conference and the impact the President’s rhetoric has on the Somali community.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.

Subscribe to the Minnesota Now podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.

We attempt to make transcripts for Minnesota Now available the next business day after a broadcast. When ready they will appear here.

An audit of Minnesota’s voter registration system mostly validated steps taken to update records and verify eligibility, although the report does recommend ways to better maintain those records and verify their accuracy in a timely fashion.

The Office of the Legislative Auditor reviewed records from 2024 in reaching its conclusions. The resulting audit found wide compliance with identity verification steps — noting those were done correctly by counties in 99 percent of cases when done through automated procedures but at lower rates when done manually.

Auditors also said counties could do a better job of updating voter records, including for formerly incarcerated people who have voting rights restored.

“It is important that the voter status in each SVRS voter registration record is accurate to help ensure a fair and secure election system,” auditors wrote. “An incorrect voter status can impede someone from exercising their legal right to vote or allow someone to vote unchallenged when they should be required to present additional information.”

Election administration is in the spotlight as the midterm approaches and Republicans, led by President Donald Trump, repeatedly raise doubts about voting integrity.

Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon said he appreciated the guidance offered in ensuring state and county partners are following prescribed steps.

“Minnesota is proud of its accurate, fair, secure, accessible and trusted election system,” Simon, a three-term Democrat, wrote in a response appended to the audit. “And this report reflects the complex administration work done at both the state and local levels to ensure compliance with both state and federal laws.”

Cory Kampf, president of the Minnesota Association of County Officers, said he agrees that “improvements can and should be made.” But Kampf said the local administrators believe that some of the perceived lapses could have been cases where determination work was done outside of the Statewide Voter Registration System or is difficult to carry out close to an election with many priorities to balance.

“Additional avenues to register, along with other new election laws, have placed new workload demands on county election offices,” Kampf wrote.

The audit did not address others involved in voter registration, including other state agencies and election judges who are part of the election-day registration process. Nor did the audit cover voter outreach efforts or election security.

The report was presented to a legislative committee Wednesday, during which Democrats praised the report, saying it shows the integrity of the state’s voting systems.

“I'll just be honest, I've never been in an audit before of most of our things that say over 99 percent, both accuracy and accessibility,” said Rep. Emma Greenman, DFL-Minneapolis.

But Republicans did not have such a rosy view, saying that any kind of lapses, even if it is a small percentage, could allow someone to cast a vote in a close election. They honed in on Election Day registrations.

“We should have a mechanism where we verify the identity prior to that ballot getting cast, so that we don't have to worry about trying to figure out we can't pull a ballot back, it's in the box,” said Sen. Cal Bahr, R-East Bethel.

Minnesota has nearly 3.8 million people registered to vote as of this January. That includes some 33,000 who are on a challenged status that requires them to answer questions before being permitted to vote.

The state and counties share responsibility to maintain the voter registration system, although counties deal more often with the records because they manage polling places and handle ballots on the day of elections.

The system is supposed to be updated when counties learn that a voter’s circumstances have changed — they move, they die, they are placed under a guardianship or they become ineligible due to incarceration for a felony conviction, for instance.

Auditors said the secretary of state’s office satisfied its requirements to pass along information from state agencies but counties didn’t always update their records as required by law. The report recommends that both election administration partners take steps to keep the records up to date.

The Legislature often follows the audits in crafting or revising laws. The Legislature next convenes in January.

President Trump said Wednesday he believes the current ceasefire with Iran is over after an exchange of attacks between the U.S. and Iran, the latest escalation straining the agreement to end the war.

"I think it's over. I don't want to deal with them anymore. They're scum," Trump told reporters in Ankara, where he is attending the NATO summit.

He called the Iranian leaders "vicious, violent people."

"If they had a nuclear weapon, they'd use it," he added.

Trump, however, did not rule out talks continuing to permanently end the war with Iran.

He said the top U.S. negotiators, Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner, want to negotiate.

But, Trump added, "as far as I'm concerned, it's just a waste of time dealing with them. They're liars."

There was no immediate response from the Iranian government.

His comments came after the U.S. and Iran traded attacks again overnight Wednesday, the second such escalation since the two sides signed an interim deal in mid-June.

The strikes followed Tuesday's attacks on three commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz. The U.S. said it carried out strikes on Iranian targets in what it said was retaliation for the previous Iranian aggression. Iranian Revolutionary Guard said it responded to those strikes by launching missiles and drones against Kuwait and Bahrain, two Arab Gulf countries that host U.S. military bases.

Trump is in Ankara, Turkey, to attend the NATO summit, where he has continued to air grievances, lamenting that European countries don't contribute enough to their own defense spending, as Russia's war against Ukraine has dragged on.

He has also expressed frustration since the U.S. and Israel's war with Iran began that Europe hasn't been supportive enough of his agenda.

Earlier in the day, the president said he was "testing" allies on how they'd help with the war.

"Italy turned us down, and Germany turned us down, and France turned us down, and it's OK, but you know, why are we spending hundreds of billions of dollars and they're not there for us? We've always been there for them," Trump said.

The tension between Trump and NATO nations has also grown as the president continued on Tuesday to insist that the U.S. should have control of Greenland, a territory currently under Denmark.

Despite friction in the alliance, at the gathering Trump has discussed some issues important to him related to the U.S.-Israel-led war in Iran, such as increased defense spending and logistics around opening the Strait of Hormuz.

And as the two-day summit ends, Trump is expected to take questions during a Wednesday press conference.

The brief two-day gathering typically left little time for one-on-one meetings, but Trump was expected to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the gathering. Negotiating an end to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine has been an elusive goal for Trump, who has teased recently that the end of the war is "getting closer," without providing much further detail. He also said he recently spoke to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

On Tuesday, Trump met with the leader of the host nation, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whom he considers a friend. The two discussed the U.S. potentially selling F-35 fighter jets to Turkey — despite there being a congressional ban in place that prevents this.

"We have a very good relationship. … Why wouldn't we do that?" Trump said in his meeting with Erdogan.

Tina Kraja in Washington, D.C., contributed reporting to this story.

Copyright 2026, NPR

Nearly 75,000 people got approval to take paid family and medical leave under the state’s program in the first six months since it got off the ground.

Officials in the Department of Employment and Economic Development provided an update Tuesday about who had applied for the partial pay replacement to take time to bond with a new child, heal from a sickness or injury or care for a loved one.

They reported that 126,373 applications had been submitted, with an approval rate of nearly 60 percent so far. An application doesn’t automatically translate into granted leave. Some applications are still pending or the denials are subject to further consideration.

Almost half of the approved leave cases — 38,000 — were for family bonding. Medical leave requires applicants to include certification from a health provider and that category had a lower approval rate.

DEED Commissioner Matt Varilek said that despite some small hiccups, the rollout had gone off pretty well.

“We had predictions that we would be behind schedule in launching, we had predictions that we would be over budget in launching, we had predictions that the technology would not work properly,” Varilek said. “I'm happy to note that on those three measures: We came in under budget with implementation. We launched early. And the technology has operated smoothly.”

The program was funded through a one-time state payment of $668 million in 2023 and is topped off by payroll taxes collected from workers and employers. Leaders from the paid family leave office said there was an initial bump in applications early this year as parents applied for bonding leave.

Parents who welcomed children in 2025 were also eligible to apply within one year of that family expansion event — a birth or adoption.

But applications have since trended down, with between 3,000 and 4,000 applications for paid leave coming in each month.

“We've really leveled off,” said DEED deputy commissioner Evan Rowe. “By about the third week in January, we saw applications to new applicants declined by about a quarter, and now we're really starting to get into that more steady state of program operations as we go along.”

Rowe said the state would consult an actuarial analysis this month to determine whether the payroll tax rate for workers and employers would need to increase from the current level.

The officials noted that while the program allows people to take up to 12 weeks of paid leave — with a possible longer combination if someone takes medical and bonding or caring leave in a calendar year — the average times are lower.

Minnesotans who took time to bond with a child took 8.2 weeks on average, those taking medical leave took 6.5 weeks on average and those who took caring leave used 5.7 weeks on average.

Here’s an additional breakdown of where the program stands after six months:

• The department reports that it has processed 126,373 unique applications from 116,617 applicants. Of those, 74,687 were approved.

• Fifty percent of applications were for medical leave, 36 percent were for bonding leaving, 14 percent for caring leave and the remainder were for safety and military family leave.

• On average, people taking paid leave received $1,083 a week. With the maximum someone could make from the program capped at $1,423 a week. Pay is determined based on someone’s income, with those who make less receiving a larger percent of their typical pay.

• Fifty-eight percent of those who applied were under the age of 40 and 64 percent of applicants were women. Fifty-four percent of those who applied made less than $78,000 a year.

Two tankers were struck by projectiles Tuesday in the Strait of Hormuz, the British military said, in the latest attacks targeting vessels moving through the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf.

One of the tankers was traveling off the coast of Oman and caught fire, according to the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center. Iranian state television said the liquefied natural gas tanker came under attack after ignoring warnings but did not directly claim the assault.

It was not immediately clear where the second tanker was when it was hit. The vessel was believed to have sustained structural damage, but no one was injured, the maritime agency said.

Tehran, which has repeatedly declared that only its approved route through the strait is safe, is suspected of attacking other ships that have used another route close to the Omani shore.

The U.S. is eager to press ahead with negotiations with Iran aimed at fully reopening the strait, rolling back Tehran’s disputed nuclear program and reaching a permanent end to the war launched Feb. 28. Previous attacks in the strait have sparked retaliatory strikes by the U.S. Iran then attacked Gulf Arab states.

In peacetime, a fifth of all traded oil and natural gas passed through the channel.

Meanwhile, talks between Iran and the U.S. appeared to be on hold until after the burial of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed at the beginning of the war. Mourners at his funeral have called for the death of U.S. President Donald Trump.

Authorities flew Khamenei's body to the Shiite seminary city of Qom, where mourners honored him Tuesday.

Tanker struck in latest attack in strait

The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center said the tanker was hit near Limah, Oman, in the strait. The UKMTO said the projectile hit the port side of the vessel as it tried to travel south out of the strait toward the Gulf of Oman.

The agency said there were no environmental effects from the strike and that authorities were investigating.

Iranian state TV, quoting anonymous sources, implied that Tehran carried out the assault on a tanker it said was carrying natural gas from Qatar. However, there was no official claim from the Islamic Republic for the attack.

Majed Al-Ansari, a spokesperson for the Qatari Foreign Ministry, said targeting the Qatari tanker, Al Rekayyat, in the strait was an “unacceptable attack” on international navigation and global energy security. He called it a “serious and explicit violation” of international law.

In a post on X, he said Qatar holds Iran “fully legally responsible” for the attack.

Iran’s joint military command warned last Thursday that all oil tankers moving through the strait must use its approved routes. It also said that interference by U.S. forces in the strait “will be met with a rapid and decisive reaction.”

But the Joint Maritime Information Center, a multinational body overseen by the U.S. Navy, told shippers Monday that the route around Oman “has been expanded and remains available for all traffic.”

Speaking Monday at the White House, Trump warned Iran that it would need to “make a deal, or we're going to finish the job.”

“I'd rather make a deal, because I don’t want to affect 91 million people,” Trump said. “We can knock down their bridges in one hour. We can knock out their energy supply.”

Iran and the United States agreed as part of an interim deal to allow ships to pass without paying charges for 60 days. But Tehran insisted it must control the routes of the vessels and later charge fees for passage, which would upend decades of practice in the waterway.

The U.S. and many Gulf Arab states say they will not agree to Iran charging for passage through the strait. An effort by Oman and a United Nations agency to launch a new route near Oman’s shore earlier sparked attacks across the Mideast.

The data firm Kpler reported that over last weekend at least 108 ships crossed through the strait using various routes.

Mourners gather in Qom for Khamenei's funeral

Iranian state television early Tuesday aired live images from a helicopter of hundreds of thousands of people walking toward Jamkaran Mosque, just south of Qom, for a funeral service for Khamenei. Shiites believe the mosque once hosted the Muhammad al-Mahdi, the 12th and last Shiite imam, who disappeared in the 9th century and will one day reappear to bring justice to the world.

Images of Khamenei and his son, Iran's new Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, were displayed on banners and posters held by mourners. Mojtaba Khamenei has yet to make an appearance in the funeral ceremonies, which are unfolding over several days. He is believed to be in hiding after reportedly being wounded in the airstrike that killed his father.

At the height of the war, before an April ceasefire, Israel targeted top Iranian leaders, in at least one case likely using their public appearances to fix their position. It has also threatened to kill the younger Khamenei.

Authorities have shut down streets, airspace and daily life for the mourning, which began Saturday and will end Thursday as Khamenei is buried at the Imam Reza shrine in Mashhad, his birthplace. Khamenei was 86.

Grand jury subpoenas against top Minnesota political figures and their offices triggered a legal back-and-forth in private until a federal judge invalidated the expansive document demand last month and ordered sealed court records be made public.

At the direction of U.S. District Court Judge Patrick Schiltz, most of those court documents have been put out in the open in recent days.

They reveal how Justice Department officials based their probe on old training handbooks, public remarks and social media postings to suggest interference with a winter surge of federal immigration enforcement. Attorneys for the Minnesota leaders in turn argued the investigation was an abuse of the grand jury process and an attempt at political intimidation.

Who and what was subject to the subpoenas issued in January?

At the urging of federal lawyers, a grand jury granted the subpoenas in January that ordered several offices to turn over a broad range of documents.

Those subpoenaed were the offices of Gov. Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her and the governing boards of Hennepin and Ramsey counties.

The demand included records, manuals, communications and more about the federal immigration surge in Minnesota. The requests went back to Jan. 1, 2025 — well before thousands of agents were sent to Minnesota.

What did U.S. Department of Justice officials say led to their investigatory subpoenas?

The Justice Department lawyers contended there was “sufficient factual predicate” to show there was deliberate “obstruction, hindrance and interference with federal immigration enforcement.”

They contend there were both formal and informal policies they say required Minnesota local and state government employees to impede the operation. In the case of Hennepin County, the federal officials pointed to training manuals that encouraged “respectful stalling” in order to frustrate ICE access and goals.

Those types of actions, the lawyers said, provided a reasonable basis to investigate whether there was a coordinated campaign to resist federal law enforcement. Lawyers for Hennepin County pushed back on the contention and said the description of the training for staff “is inaccurate and, in any event, not indicative of a crime.”

The documents also cite press conferences and public statements by city leaders that they would protect residents from the surge of agents.

How did the Minnesota officials and their offices respond?

A team of lawyers assembled by the affected entities fought the federal claims as based on inference and innuendo. That effort to push back began in February.

In one previously sealed document, the lawyers for Walz raised concerns about the subpoenas intruding on independent state authority and said “the federal government fails to offer any evidence or explanation for a grand jury investigation of a sitting governor and his office.”

They went on to say “the public record establishes this subpoena is part of an effort to criminalize and publicize a political dispute between the president of the United States and the governor of Minnesota, and an improper attempt by the former to intimidate the latter into capitulating.”

Attorneys for the Minnesota officials said the investigation wasn’t being done in good faith and for that reason the judge should take the extraordinary step of releasing material that was filed under seal to show the public what had transpired.

How unusual is the release of grand jury-related documents that had previously been filed under seal?

Judge Schiltz agreed that the circumstances warranted the rare step of publicly releasing the information.

In his order last month, Schiltz wrote any connections between the information the government had sought and any crime “range from extremely weak to nonexistent.” The judge added that the evidence is overwhelming “that these subpoenas were not issued to investigate, but to harass, coerce and retaliate.”

Justice Department lawyers sought to shield the materials.

In an April 14 filing, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Flavio de Abreu urged the judge to adhere to the long practice of secrecy of grand jury proceedings. He wrote that it is vital to guard against chilling participation of witnesses concerned about retaliation or attempts to influence grand jurors.

“In this case, the government has repeatedly noted that the targets of the investigation remain unidentified,” Abreu told the court in a brief. “Publicizing this proceeding — and the government’s discussion of the investigation during the April 1 hearing — would notify any potential unidentified targets of the course, purpose and scope of the government’s investigation.”

Those subpoenaed alleged that federal government leaks put the matter into public view so it shouldn’t be afforded the secrecy protections it cast as vital.

“The circumstances indicate that an attorney for the government must have either shared secret grand jury information with the press (or another government official not entitled to see the information) or that a non-DOJ official was aware of the plans to issue subpoenas because they directed DOJ to do so,” lawyers for Ellison wrote in a March court filing urging the subpoenas be quashed and an investigation begin into possible grand jury breaches.

Did everything related to the subpoenas get made public?

Not yet. Some materials will remain sealed until at least July 15 or for even longer. That’s a deadline Schiltz set for the U.S. government lawyers to contest his order.

There are a few exhibits that weren’t made public.

Correction (July 7, 2026): This story has been updated to reflect the grand jury subpoenas for documents from Minnesota officials were issued in January, with the legal effort to push back beginning in February.

Federal agents with Homeland Security Investigations tried to track down Rochester resident David Streever last month and give him a warning notice alleging that he had potentially violated the law when he wrote a harsh email months earlier to the former head of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Now a lawsuit filed by the nonprofit Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression on Monday in federal court in Washington, D.C. argues Streever's January email was protected speech and the federal agents' and their superiors violated Streever's First Amendment rights.

NPR reported last week about HSI agents trying to contact Streever first at his home and later at a hotel over an email that Streever wrote to Todd Lyons, who stepped down as the acting director of ICE at the end of May.

FIRE's lawsuit says the First Amendment protects Americans' rights to speak out against police but says the "Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is actively threatening that freedom, tracking down and retaliating against speakers like Plaintiff David Streever because he exercised his fundamental right to criticize one of the highest-ranking law enforcement officers in the United States."

The suit goes on to say, "Our Constitution does not tolerate such a brazen abuse of authority."

Streever wrote to Lyons' government email address on Jan. 26 after federal immigration officers in Minneapolis fatally shot two U.S. citizen observers during the immigration enforcement surge there.

The three-paragraph note compared Lyons to a Nazi and predicted that Lyons would be tormented by his own conscience. It has the subject line, "What's next."

Five months later, on June 23, two HSI agents rang the doorbell of Streever's Rochester home and then left a document with Streever's wife for him to sign. It was labeled "WARNING NOTICE" and "YOU MAY BE IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW," and described federal laws that make it a crime to threaten federal officials. The notice said ICE's Office of Professional Responsibility had identified an email to Lyons that may violate federal law and the office "is requesting that you promptly remove and/or discontinue the aforementioned behavior."

The bottom of the form reads, "Receipt of this Notice will be taken into consideration, should you continue to be involved in any criminal activities described above."

Streever was taking his 7-year-old daughter on a vacation to a Finnish theme park when the agents visited his home. He and his daughter landed at New York City's John F. Kennedy International Airport two days later and made their way to a nearby airport hotel to sleep.

That evening, Streever was told by the hotel front desk that a federal agent from the Department of Homeland Security had come to see him and had left a business card. His wife had not told the agents which hotel he would be staying at, raising questions about how Streever had been tracked to that location.

"Like many Americans, I was deeply upset after the shootings in Minnesota and I felt compelled to do something," Streever said in a statement. "Writing an email to the head of ICE seemed like the least I could do to express my sense of outrage. I never dreamed it would lead to a knock on my door by federal officers or descending on my hotel in the dark of night."

The lawsuit names three federal agents who tried to contact Streever as defendants along with Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin and ICE officials.

The suit argues the federal agents' actions have caused Streever to self-censor his views, and alleges they violated a First Amendment bar on the government threatening people over protected speech.

The lawsuit asks for the court to find that Streever's email was protected by the First Amendment, and to bar defendants "from taking any further actions, formal or informal, to coerce, threaten, retaliate against, or intimate repercussions directly or indirectly to Plaintiff Streever for his protected speech and petitioning activity."

The suit also asks the court to declare the warning notices federal agents are issuing people are "sufficient" to chill free expression protected by the First Amendment.

"ICE's issuance of formal "WARNING NOTICE" documents to critics who engage in protected speech—and its decision to have federal agents deliver those warnings in person—can have only one purpose: to systemically chill ICE's critics and coerce them into silence," the suit reads.

DHS responded with the same statement that it provided last week when NPR first asked about Streever's case. "ICE investigates all credible threats towards its employees and officers, including threats to the ICE Director. As a matter of policy, we do not comment on any ongoing investigations."

Adam Steinbaugh, senior attorney at FIRE, said in a statement the government's delayed response to Streever's January email undermines its investigation.

"If someone is really threatening a government official, you don't wait five months to act on it," Steinbaugh said in the statement. "The fact that authorities didn't respond immediately shows that David presented no threat. This pursuit is designed to intimidate lawful speech, pure and simple."

Poll worker given the same warning notice

The lawsuit mentions that the same day HSI agents visited Streever's home on June 23, they also confronted Paigelynne Gonyea, a Syracuse resident who was working at a polling place for the New York primary election that day, about an Instagram post.

While Gonyea was at Syracuse's Central Library working the polls, an HSI agent left her a voicemail that said the agents had just visited her former apartment and were calling "in reference to a post that we believe you made on Instagram where you doxxed an ICE agent back in January."

Doxxing typically refers to releasing sensitive information about a person online.

Gonyea called the agent back. She said the agents had wanted her to come outside the polling place to speak with them but she told NPR she did not trust them, and had told them to come talk to her inside the polling place when there was a lull in voters.

Local election officials later said the federal agents should not have gone inside, given that police are not supposed to enter polling places unless there is an emergency and a recently enacted New York law bars federal immigration officers from voting sites.

Video captured by fellow poll workers shows two agents with badges speaking with Gonyea inside the library and delivering a warning notice that said her Instagram account may have violated the law. Gonyea said the agents did not tell her which of her posts had prompted their visit but they had confirmed it was a post about Jonathan Ross, the ICE officer who fatally shot Renee Macklin Good in Minneapolis.

Gonyea denied to NPR and other news outlets that she had ever doxxed Ross and had said she thought the agents were referring to a post she made that identified Ross by name after the Minnesota Star Tribune had reported it, and called for Ross to be indicted. That post is still visible on her Instagram account.

But after NPR and other media outlets wrote about the encounter, DHS released a statement that said Gonyea "committed a federal crime by posting the address of an ICE law enforcement officer online." The statement continued, "Doxxing federal law enforcement officers is a federal crime that puts their lives and their families in serious danger…If you doxx our officers, we will investigate you, and you will be brought to justice."

DHS did not respond to requests from NPR to provide evidence that Gonyea had doxxed Ross. But the department did share with the Associated Press a redacted screenshot taken from a cell phone of a different Instagram post that looks like it was posted from Gonyea's account.

The post that was shown to AP is a photo of Ross with text that reads, "The killer's name is Jonathan Ross of" and the rest is redacted, presumably by DHS. The post does not currently appear on Gonyea's Instagram account. The screenshot shows it was taken six hours after the post went up but does not show a date.

Gonyea told NPR she had the opportunity to review the screenshot of the post but she did not believe she had posted it.

"Based on everything I know, I do not believe that I made that post, and I have no independent recollection of ever creating or publishing it," she told NPR in a text message.

"There is additional context that I believe is important, and I look forward to addressing those matters through the appropriate process rather than in the press," she wrote.

"What has not changed is my concern about the broader constitutional issues raised by my experience, including free speech, due process and government accountability."

Steinbaugh from FIRE told NPR last week that a social media post that shares a person's address alone is not a criminal offense.

"What the law criminalizes is publishing an address or sharing an address with the intent to convey a threat," Steinbaugh said. "So if you post an address and say, 'Hey, gang, at 5:00 tonight, we're going to all meet up here with our pitchforks and torches,' that puts you more in the ballpark of a threat."

He said some social media posts that publicized Ross's address were in the context of a broader public debate about whether federal immigration officers can wear masks and refuse to identify themselves "and essentially [act] almost as a secret police." He said for that reason, some posts that shared information about Ross were a form of protest.

"People might think that that is speech that people should not engage in, but it's still protected and it can't be criminalized," Steinbaugh said.

Gonyea and Streever are the first two people who have made public that they received warning notices from Homeland Security agents about their online communications.

Copyright 2026, NPR