SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " Citizens " 566 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Trump's noncitizen voter data remains a mystery. But the claims raise midterm fears
Trump officials say they found 250,000 noncitizens on voter rolls in just four states. Those states don't know where the numbers came from, and some worry what the claims may portend for the midterms.
The Newest Federally Recognized Tribe Wants Better Healthcare. It May Be On Its Own.
North Carolina's Robeson County, where most of the tribe’s citizens live, ranks as one of the worst counties in the U.S. for health disparities. After securing federal recognition, Lumbee tribal leaders will have to decide how to address them.
The Lumbee Tribe of N.C. wants better healthcare, but plans to fund it are in limbo
Robeson County, N.C., where most of the Lumbee Tribe's citizens live, ranks as one of the worst counties in the U.S. for health. The tribe can access the Indian Health Service now, but it's not likely to be sufficient to improve the health of the community.
'Show me how this ends.' Thune responds to Trump’s escalated calls to pass SAVE America Act
Senate Majority Leader John Thune responded to President Donald Trump's escalating calls Monday to cancel the August recess until the Senate passes a proof-of-citizenship voting bill by again challenging the president.
Tocqueville’s Political Science of American Democracy
The dispersal of power that makes the republic safe for its citizens is the same dispersal that leaves those outside it with nowhere to appeal.
Trump demands Senate cancel August break until it passes the SAVE America Act
President Donald Trump is calling on Senate Majority Leader John Thune to keep senators in Washington until they pass a strict proof-of-citizenship voting bill.
Commentary: Will Illinois meet the moment to rein in data centers and save us from skyrocketing power bills?
It’s time for policymakers to make Big Tech pay for the costs they cause, writes the executive director of the Citizens Utility Board.
Bombshell memo shows Biden planned to leave Trump with even more massive immigration crisis
Sen. Eric Schmitt obtained a Biden White House memo revealing plans to expand TPS to over 3.1 million noncitizens in the administration's final days.
Photo gallery: King’s College hosts Health Science Summer Camp
King’s College hosted its 3rd annual Health Science Summer Camp this week.
Ranking Members Markey, Velázquez Push to Roll Back Trump Administration’s Discriminatory SBA Lending Policy that Blocks Immigrant Entrepreneurs from Pursuing the American Dream
Bicameral resolution would rescind Trump administration policy banning green card holders from accessing SBA loans Resolution Text (PDF) | One-Pager (PDF) (Washington, July 23) – Ranking Member Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and House Small Business Committee Ranking Member Nydia M. Velázquez (D-NY-7) today introduced a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to rescind the Trump administration’s policy that bans green card holders from accessing essential Small Business Administration (SBA) loans to start and grow their businesses and invest in Main Streets nationwide. Trump’s SBA restrictions buck decades of precedent, attacking immigrant small business owners who are lawfully in the U.S. with no justification. The Trump administration’s green card holder ban is the most recent escalation of SBA’s draconian citizenship restrictions that are killing jobs and putting the American Dream further out of reach for entrepreneurs. In Fiscal Year 2025, the SBA made an estimated $5.7 billion in loans to green card holders, which supported more than 80,000 American jobs. Ranking Member Markey’s introduction of the CRA resolution follows his introduction of the Investing in the American Dream Act alongside Ranking Member Velázquez earlier this year. The Investing in the American Dream Act would roll back the SBA’s draconian lending restrictions and restore previous SBA lending policies for immigrant entrepreneurs lawfully in the U.S., including green card holders, refugees, and asylees. More than 100 organizations have called for the passage of the legislation and over 60 Massachusetts state legislators have raised concerns about the impact of the citizenship restrictions in their local communities. “Once again, Donald Trump is shutting hardworking immigrants out of the American Dream with his discriminatory and dangerous policies, fear tactics, and violent rhetoric. The anti-small business lending requirements implemented by Trump’s SBA won’t Make America Great Again—they are Making America Hate Again,” said Ranking Member Markey. “I am fighting every single day to roll back Trump’s brazen attempt to steal the American Dream from entrepreneurs in Massachusetts and across the country who enrich our communities, strengthen our Main Streets, and create jobs in the United States.” “Starting and owning your own business is one of the pillars of the American Dream. Under the Trump Administration, the SBA has sought to deny immigrant small business owners and entrepreneurs that dream by preventing them from accessing the capital they need to grow and scale their businesses. Not only is this policy cruel, but it is also self-defeating and holds our country back economically. As Ranking Member of the House Small Business Committee, I will do everything in my power to reverse this terrible policy,” said Ranking Member Velázquez. Massachusetts state legislators applauded Ranking Member Markey’s actions and emphasized the critical contributions of green card holders to Bay State communities and the Commonwealth’s economy. "Green card holders are our neighbors, workers, entrepreneurs, and taxpayers,” said Massachusetts State Senator Adam Gómez (D-Springfield), Senate Chair of the Joint Committee on Community Development and Small Businesses. “They open restaurants, launch small businesses, create jobs, and contribute every day to the economic strength of Massachusetts. Denying lawful permanent residents access to SBA loan programs doesn't make our economy stronger—it makes it harder for small businesses to succeed. I support this resolution because opportunity should never be limited by unnecessary barriers that prevent hardworking people from investing in their communities and pursuing the American dream." “Senator Markey’s CRA Resolution provides a valuable moment for our federal leaders to show their commitment to small businesses and the American Dream,” said Massachusetts State Representative Andy X. Vargas (D-Haverhill), House Chair of the Joint Committee on Community Development and Small Businesses. “The SBA’s recent policy restricting lawful residents from accessing the popular 7(a) and 504 programs has shut out some of the most entrepreneurial and hard-working members of our community from much-need capital. In Massachusetts, these programs have invested millions of dollars into small businesses owned by green card holders, supporting thousands of jobs. This should not be a partisan issue. People who worked hard, have legal status, and contribute so much to their communities via employment and economic impact don’t deserve to be in the crosshairs for political purposes. The Senator’s resolution is a step forward in restoring access to the American Dream that small business owners across the country deserve.” Several small business advocates and stakeholders voiced their support for Ranking Member Markey’s efforts to roll back Trump SBA’s discriminatory lending rules. “Immigrant-owned businesses are the foundation of the American economy. They power our neighborhoods, provide essential services, and employ our loved ones. Yet, systemic hurdles like the Small Business Administration’s citizenship restrictions unfairly block their path to prosperity," said Elizabeth Sweet, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy (MIRA) Coalition. "We applaud Senator Markey’s continued leadership and look forward to a future where immigrant entrepreneurs can share their ingenuity without arbitrary restrictions that hold us all back.” “Independent restaurants have always been built by people willing to work hard, take risks, and invest in their communities. When lawfully authorized entrepreneurs lose access to the financing they need to start or grow a business, we all lose. These are the businesses creating jobs, filling storefronts, and strengthening our neighborhoods. Access to capital should help good businesses succeed, and that’s exactly what restoring these SBA loan programs would do,” said Jen Ziskin, Executive Director of Massachusetts Restaurants United. “At the Latino Economic Development Corporation, we see firsthand that access to capital transforms lives, creates jobs, and strengthens neighborhoods. Many of the entrepreneurs we serve are lawful permanent residents who have invested their savings, opened businesses, and employ local residents. Restricting access to SBA financing doesn’t just impact business owners, it limits economic opportunity for entire communities. Main Street succeeds when every qualified entrepreneur has a fair chance to grow,” said Andrew Melendez, CEO and Founder of the Latino Economic Development Corporation. "Immigrants and immigrant-owned businesses are the heart and soul of small business communities in cities and towns throughout the Commonwealth, and across America. Limiting access to these SBA loans not only sends the wrong message about immigration, it will have significant negative economic impact on our small business ecosystem,” said Keith Mahoney, Vice President of Public Affairs at the Boston Foundation. “The SBA’s recent policy changes that prevent Legal Permanent Residents, and other non-citizens from participating in any of the SBA’s valuable programs are changes that are unwelcome, immoral, and antithetical to our purpose, our mission, and our vision for Massachusetts communities and businesses. Immigrant entrepreneurs and others have expressed concern that Common Capital will ‘report them to ICE,’ so loan demand has decreased. There is no valid reason for excluding Legal Permanent Residents and other noncitizens who are lawfully present in the U.S. from accessing the SBA’s programs. Immigrant entrepreneurs start businesses, they create jobs, they support their families and their communities. Our government should be in the business of encouraging their full participation in our economy,” said Raymond Lanza-Weil, President of Common Capital. "ECCHO-Latino now represents over 400 educators and 300 microbusinesses across Massachusetts, where immigrants make up 60% of the childcare workforce. When a green card holder is ready to grow her business—from expanding her home child care to opening a center—she shouldn't be turned away by local banks simply because of federal citizenship rules. Blocking access to SBA loans kills opportunity and deepens our state's childcare crisis. ECCHO-Latino strongly supports Senator Markey and Representative Velázquez in passing this resolution to put Main Street first," said Harold Antonio Blanco, Co-Founder & Executive Director of ECCHO-Latino Inc. "This is exactly how political ideology ruins an economy. Washington has taken lawful, tax-paying entrepreneurs who live in our communities, invest in America, and hire American workers, and declared their businesses ineligible for critical financing simply because a green card holder owns even a fraction of the company. Using policies ostensibly aimed at illegal immigration to punish lawful permanent residents is nothing short of ideological overreach and economic self-sabotage. The SBA exists to help viable small businesses grow, rather than imposing nativist tests that ignore an entrepreneur’s credit history, business plan, or ability to create jobs. When the federal government closes the door on qualified entrepreneurs, they’re also closing the door on American entrepreneurship and on American workers, while handing future companies, jobs, innovation, and investment to our competitors. America should be competing to attract people who want to invest and build here, not creating arbitrary barriers that drive their talent and capital elsewhere,” said Javier Palomarez, President and CEO of the United States Hispanic Business Council (USHBC). "The U.S. Small Business Administration's decision to prohibit legal permanent residents, including green card holders, from accessing SBA-backed loans has the potential for disastrous consequences that could reverberate throughout America's economy for years to come. After all, immigrants are twice as likely to start small businesses as U.S.-born individuals. Congress must overturn rules requiring the SBA to block legal permanent residents from accessing lending resources because so many of the entrepreneurs who drive job creation in this country were born outside the United States," said John Arensemeyer, Founder and CEO of Small Business Majority. “NCRC supports the Congressional Review Act resolution to overturn SBA’s citizenship restrictions that bar green-card holders from receiving the 7(a) and 504 loans. When qualified entrepreneurs are denied access to SBA loans, all of Main Street gets hurt. Communities lose jobs. Neighborhoods lose services. Local economies lose the opportunity to build wealth and shrink disparities,” said Jesse Van Tol, President & CEO of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition (NCRC). “We cannot afford to have the American Dream out of reach for hard-working, immigrant small business owners.” “Asian Americans and Asian immigrants have been integral in building local economies. They create businesses, jobs, and opportunities in communities across the country that benefit everyone. Lawful permanent residents pay taxes, invest in their communities, and strengthen Main Street, yet the SBA's discriminatory citizenship restrictions unfairly deny them access to the same tools that help small businesses grow and succeed. We applaud congressional leaders for advancing this resolution to overturn the latest restrictions on SBA lending for green card holders, and we urge lawmakers to also pass the Investing in the American Dream Act to fully restore access to SBA loan programs for all eligible people in the United States. Ensuring that immigrant-owned small businesses have a fair opportunity to access capital is essential to building a stronger, more inclusive economy that works for all,” said Joanna Derman, Director of Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights and National Security at Asian Americans Advancing Justice (AAJC). "Immigrant-owned businesses often turn to SBA 7(a) and 504 loans because they face higher denial rates from traditional lenders,” said Imani Augustus, Director of the Center for Entrepreneurial Opportunity. "These programs provide the capital they need to expand operations, hire workers, and invest in their businesses. Reversing the ban on lawful permanent residents is a critical first step toward ensuring these financing tools are accessible to everyone strengthening their communities through entrepreneurship. We applaud this action and urge Congress to fully restore access by passing the Investing in the American Dream Act.” "Last year, nearly 5,700 SBA loans worth $5.7 billion went to businesses owned by green card holders, supporting more than 80,000 jobs. These are entrepreneurs who have put down roots here, hired their neighbors, and invested in the communities they call home. Barring them from capital doesn't protect Main Street—it starves it. What should matter is the strength of a business and its potential to grow, not the immigration status of its owner. This resolution doesn’t eliminate all the citizenship restrictions in SBA’s policy change, but it’s a step toward restoring a commonsense principle that stood for more than 30 years," said Howard Wial, Director of Research at ICIC. "I'm encouraged to see Congress moving to reopen access to capital for green card holders, a key tool for small business survival. Green card holders accounted for an estimated 5,700 SBA loans in Fiscal Year 2025, worth $5.7 billion and supporting more than 80,000 jobs across the country. That capital is often what keeps a business operating through its toughest stretches when cash flow gets tight. When qualified entrepreneurs lose access to that capital over their immigration status rather than their ability to repay a loan, it's the local economy that pays the price,” said Small Business for America's Future Co-Chair Shaundell Newsome, Founder of Sumnu Marketing. “Small businesses are the backbone of the American economy, and entrepreneurs —including green card holders — take risks every day to build businesses, create jobs, and strengthen communities. SBA loan programs should be administered with clear, consistent standards that safeguard public resources while ensuring these programs remain focused on supporting eligible entrepreneurs and job creators. This resolution responds to the opportunity to support all entrepreneurs and preserve the integrity of federally supported lending programs. We applaud the introduction of this resolution and remain committed to policies that strengthen small businesses, promote economic growth, and maintain confidence in these vital lending programs,” said Carolina Martinez, CEO of CAMEO Network. “National CAPACD wholeheartedly supports the introduction of this resolution aimed at overturning the SBA's misguided policy prohibiting immigrants from accessing the 7(a) and 504 loan programs. As a coalition, we are committed to creating systems, organizations, and societies that are fair and just. We believe we and our economy are stronger when we uplift our rich and diverse communities. Access to capital helps small businesses create jobs, build wealth, and strengthen neighborhoods. Restoring this pathway is an important first step toward ensuring immigrant entrepreneurs can continue to grow their businesses and contribute positively to our economy as a whole. We urge Congress to build on this momentum by passing the Investing in the American Dream Act, which would fully restore fair access to safe and affordable credit and uphold our commitment to a fair economy that works for everyone,” said Seema Agnani, CEO of National CAPACD. Ranking Member Markey is fighting for small business owners and immigrants that rely on SBA loans to start and run their businesses, create jobs, and contribute to their communities. In May, Ranking Member Markey highlighted the significant contributions of immigrant entrepreneurs in Massachusetts and across the country and condemned the Trump administration’s repeated attacks on immigrant communities at a Small Business Committee hearing. MIRA’s Elizabeth Sweet, who participated in Ranking Member Markey’s listening session earlier in May, provided testimony at the hearing. Also in May, Ranking Member Markey hosted a listening session at the Urban College of Boston to hear directly from several Massachusetts immigrant small business owners, lenders, and chambers of commerce how President Trump’s cruel and callous anti-immigrant policies are hurting Main Streets in the Bay State. Earlier in May, Ranking Member Markey hosted a press conference alongside Ranking Member Velázquez, Democratic lawmakers, and stakeholders to condemn the Trump administration’s harmful anti-immigrant lending policies and to introduce the Investing in the American Dream Act. In March, Ranking Member Markey released a comprehensive report detailing the harms to small business owners, workers, and consumers caused by the Trump administration’s ICE raids in communities across the country. In February, Ranking Member Markey introduced the Small Business ICE Disruption Fund Act, which would provide grants to small businesses that have been impacted by the Trump administration’s violent immigration enforcement actions on Main Streets across the United States. Earlier in February, Ranking Member Markey, Ranking Member Velázquez, Congressional Black Caucus Chair Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.), Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chair Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), and Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus Chair Grace Meng (D-N.Y.) sent a letter urging the SBA to rescind their lending rule change that bars legal permanent residents from receiving SBA loans. Previously, Ranking Members Markey and Velázquez released a statement condemning the actions of the SBA after it announced that small businesses with legal permanent residents will be barred from receiving SBA loans. In December 2025, Ranking Member Markey and all Democratic members of the Senate Small Business Committee sent a letter to the SBA reiterating concerns with the SBA’s citizenship requirements and highlighting a drop in SBA lending volume. In September 2025, Ranking Member Markey heard directly from SBA lenders about the issues with the citizenship verification requirements. In July 2025, Ranking Members Markey and Velázquez sent a letter to the SBA expressing serious concerns with the agency’s new, draconian citizenship verification requirements that require small businesses seeking SBA loans to be 100% owned by U.S. citizens, nationals, and legal permanent residents. SBA has not responded to the letter. ###
Seizing the Semiquincentennial: Developing a Science of Civics and the Renewal of American Citizenship
In a recent seminar hosted by Philanthropy Roundtable, Senior Director of American Values & Policy Philanthropy Clarice Smith explored this question. She was joined by two leading voices in civic education: Victoria Hughes, founder and first president of the Bill of Rights Institute, and Dr. Wilfred McClay, faculty chair at Hillsdale College and author of “The Land of Hope.”
State justice department weighs in on Salem Health-Santiam deal
The Oregon Department of Justice is planning to host a public hearing on Aug. 5 to hear feedback from citizens, but that pushes the deal past the Aug. 1 deadline Santiam says it needs to remain solvent. To comment on this story, use the form at the end of the report.
What New Jersey’s disclosure says – and doesn’t say
New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill’s disclosure Wednesday that a software glitch caused her state to mistakenly add 6,600 non-citizens to its voter rolls — and that about 400 of them improperly voted in recent years — has given Republicans something to grab onto in their long-running campaign against non-citizen voting.
New Jersey Dem gov's blame game backfires after tech company pins noncitizen voter registration on state
Gov. Mikie Sherrill says about 400 noncitizens cast ballots due to a Motor Vehicle Commission software glitch, sparking a political backlash.
First steps forward for the implementation of the Health Action Plan
ENISA is the EU agency dedicated to enhancing cybersecurity in Europe. They offer guidance, tools, and resources to safeguard citizens and businesses from cyber threats.
Governor: 6,600 noncitizens registered to vote after error in New Jersey
Gov. Mikie Sherrill says fewer than 400 of those people ended up casting ballots
Governor: 6,600 noncitizens registered to vote after error in New Jersey
Gov. Mikie Sherrill says fewer than 400 of those people ended up casting ballots
6,600 noncitizens registered to vote by New Jersey motor vehicle system error, Gov. Sherill says
The Democratic governor, who took office this year, blamed a Motor Vehicle Commission system software error but said a preliminary analysis showed that fewer than 400 of the people registered that way went on to cast ballots.
Nearly 400 noncitizens voted in New Jersey elections, governor says
Mikie Sherrill (D) said she learned of the problem, which she attributed to a software error, last week and ordered the removal of ineligible voters from the rolls.
Morocco’s Foreign-Born World Cup Squad and the Politics of Nationality
A national soccer squad comprising only foreign-born players is the latest example of Morocco’s centuries-long effort to define national identity beyond its borders.
Tuesday letters: Voter outreach, farewell, Roan Plateau drilling and national politics
Get out the vote As the November elections approach, we are reminded that democracy depends on active participation. Voting is one of the most important ways citizens can make their voices heard and help shape...
THE WEEK OF JULY 20, 2026
- US caps student visa duration - Congress looks at tightening research security - AI leaders call for regulatory body
Mets, Phillies announcers can’t believe mid-play sunglasses move
A pet peeve of many baseball viewers is when a defensive player has their sunglasses on their hat, rather than over their eyes, when the sun is out. And during Sunday’s game against the New York Mets at Citizens Bank Park, Philadelphia Phillies rookie outfielder Gabriel Rincones Jr. did put on his sunglasses, but he…
North Carolina residents thought they were getting a business park — not a data center campus
"We as citizens feel like we were snookered a bit."
Who Really Influences US Public Action: Science Or Government? A New Study Finds A Hopeful Answer
“Institutional failure does not have to lead to public paralysis. Even when leadership from the top is missing, agreement between experts and citizens can still help create momentum,” the study authors say.
What to know about the Trump administration's claim that 250K non-citizens are registered to vote in 4 states
'The facts have not changed': States push back on allegations of non-citizens voting
Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said the agency will be going through state databases to review any cases of noncitizens voting. But states say their elections remain secure.
The Evolution of Politics: From Civic Virtue to Realpolitik
While people claim they want the "virtuous" state with citizens to match, what we really get is realpolitik, whether we want it or not.
Sports without politics is a fantasy and the World Cup proves it
From ancient Greece to Nazi Germany, sport and politics have long been intertwined. Nevertheless, we still imagine that international sport can be kept above the fray and serve as a neutral arena where nations compete on merit alone. In this article, diplomacy scholar Geoffrey Allen Pigman argues the 2026 FIFA World Cup shows this is a dangerous illusion. When international sport is left entirely to revenue-maximizing private bodies like FIFA, it doesn't escape politics, but rather surrenders to its worst expressions. With the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics fast approaching, the IOC must decide whether to learn that lesson or repeat the same mistakes. The largest and most lucrative FIFA World Cup ever draws toward its climactic conclusion amidst a swirl of controversy. Team members, staff, fans, and spectators have been denied their right to enter the United States to participate, and US President Donald Trump intervened with FIFA boss Gianni Infantino to overturn a referee’s call that Trump believed disadvantaged the US national team. It is a moment to step back and reflect on what the purposes of international sport mega-events like the World Cup, and international sport more broadly, are, and what they should be. Does international sport serve public purposes? Is there a public interest? Or is it primarily a private endeavor organized by commercial enterprises to entertain the global public (and generate profit in the process), which is occasionally used by governments and leaders for raisons d’etat? Central to the idea of sport is the principle of fair play, which in the international context demands that games be free from political interference. However, it is impossible to separate sport from politics, all claims to the contrary notwithstanding. The most positive political use of international sport through the millennia has been to facilitate diplomacy. The use of international sport for diplomatic objectives has existed since at least the time of the ancient Olympic Games, around which was instituted the custom of the Ekecheiria, or Olympic Truce, between participating states to facilitate fair competition and diplomatic achievements by ensuring that participants could travel safely to the Olympiad. In his seminal work On Diplomacy (1987), diplomacy scholar James Der Derian characterized the objectives of diplomacy as overcoming alienation and mediating estrangement between governments and between peoples. One increasingly important diplomatic tool in the technology-infused media environment over the past century has been public diplomacy, under which governments and non-state diplomatic actors (e.g. transnational corporations) communicate to global publics about their international policy objectives and to shape their global brand image. Political scientist Michał Kobierecki, in his important book Sports Diplomacy (2020), views sports diplomacy as falling broadly within the ambit of public diplomacy, as international sport intimately involves the participation of global publics as spectators and consumers of global media. Diplomacy scholar Stuart Murray and this author, in a 2013 article, distinguish between international sport used for diplomatic purposes and international sport-as-diplomacy, which encompasses the range of diplomacy that occurs as teams and competitors, spectators and fans, and government officials all converge for international sporting events like the Olympic Games and FIFA World Cup. Diplomacy scholar H.E. Chehabi, in a 2001 article on US-Iran sports diplomacy, describes the interaction between spectators and fans at international sporting events as “people-to-people diplomacy,” in which relationships develop independently of governments and their objectives. Diplomacy by the aforementioned definitions is often unsuccessful. Moreover, all too often the tools of diplomacy may be employed by governments and other actors to thwart or oppose the objectives of diplomacy as characterized by Der Derian. Governments routinely use the tools of public diplomacy to disseminate propaganda, spreading misinformation in the attempt to deceive global publics about their objectives and to create misleading impressions about their brand identity. Within sports diplomacy, the term “sportswashing” has been coined recently to describe how governments invest in and promote international sport to create positive global public impressions of their nations and, in doing so, to distract the global public from their deficient records in areas such as human rights and democratic governance. Murray, in his 2018 book Sports Diplomacy: Origins, Theory and Practice, introduces the concept of sports anti-diplomacy, wherein governments intentionally use international sport to advance aggressive and nationalistic objectives. Obvious historical examples include Hitler’s use of the 1936 Berlin Olympics to glorify his Third Reich and the 1969 El Salvador-Honduras football “war.” SUGGESTED READING The beautiful game made ugly By Emily Ryall FIFA argues that it is and seeks to be apolitical in its stewardship of international Association Football (soccer). FIFA policies governing bids to host the World Cup require uninhibited and non-discriminatory access for players, team staff, and spectators of all participating countries to host nations and venues. It became clear soon after Trump returned to power in the United States in January 2025 that Trump’s political intentions and objectives to limit non-US citizens from living and working in the United States and, in numerous cases, even visiting the country, would collide with FIFA’s host nation policies. Beginning soon after the start of the second Trump administration, US federal authorities imposed restrictions on entry to the United States of citizens of between 20 and 40 countries for any purpose, with only limited exceptions. Federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) began arresting non-US citizens in the United States, including persons with and without legal status, holding them in jails, concentration camps, and other detention facilities until they were deported to their home or third countries, where they faced substantive risks to their personal safety. FIFA boss Gianni Infantino, in an effort to ensure the most successful and lucrative World Cup in history, engaged diplomatically with President Trump in an attempt to facilitate entry to the US for World Cup participants. Infantino did all in his power to ingratiate himself with Trump, to the extent of creating a FIFA “Peace Prize,” which he awarded to Trump in December 2025 at a ceremony in the then Trump-controlled John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, DC, on the occasion of the World Cup draw. The prize was an ersatz consolation for someone who aspired in vain to win the rather more prestigious and well-known Nobel Peace Prize. And in the run-up to the World Cup, conditions became worse. In February 2026, Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched a war of aggression against Iran, illegal under international law, under the false pretence that Iran’s government was preparing to attack the United States and Israel. During the US aerial bombardment of Iran, US planes bombed Azadi Stadium, the facility where Iran’s national football team trained. As the 2026 FIFA World Cup began, it was clear that Infantino’s efforts had been for naught: the Trump administration would not adhere to FIFA policies governing access to World Cup host nations. World Cup referee Omar Artan, a citizen of Somalia, was denied a US visa to enter the United States to participate in the World Cup. Trump’s government only granted US visas to Iran’s football team ten days before they were scheduled to arrive for the tournament. Numerous members of the support staff for Iran’s team were denied US visas. Iran’s team, which had been scheduled to train in Arizona, was directed to shift its training site to Tijuana, Mexico, notwithstanding that all three of their group stage matches took place at US venues. The US Department of Homeland Security only permitted the Iranian team to enter the US on the day before each scheduled match and then to return to Mexico immediately after playing. Members of Iraq’s and Switzerland’s football teams were delayed for hours by US officials at the US border, and an Iraqi team photographer was refused entry. Spectators and fans from Haïti and Iran were denied entry to the United States altogether. A large number of fans from a range of countries had their applications for US visas rejected. There were multiple off-ramps through which participants could have avoided the negative consequences of Trump’s decisions for the 2026 World Cup. Once it was clear that the Trump government intended to violate the established expectations for World Cup hosts, FIFA could have shifted the matches scheduled to take place in the United States to Mexico and Canada. The three nations were already designated as co-hosts, and host cities and venues had been selected. Once it was clear that FIFA, governed by FIFA boss Gianni Infantino’s dependent and dysfunctional relationship with Trump, would never consider this option on its own, it fell to the national football federations to act. The national federations, particularly some combination of federations of the leading contenders (France, Spain, Brazil, Argentina, Morocco, England, Germany, etc.), could have refused to participate under the US-imposed conditions or, at the least, demanded an ironclad agreement with the Trump government that FIFA policies on access would be respected. ___ International sport is inextricably entangled with diplomacy of different sorts, for good or ill, it cannot be considered to be in the purely private realm and left to revenue-maximizing private actors. ___ Why did neither FIFA nor the national football federations act to protect the interests of players, team staff, referees, fans, and spectators? In essence, the relentless engines of capitalism prevailed over norm observance, ethics, and fair play. The revenue interests of FIFA, sponsors, global media, and host cities won out. FIFA’s managers viewed hosting another World Cup principally in the United States as a veritable pot of gold for FIFA and its collaborators. FIFA has estimated its own revenue over the 2023-26 budget cycle, which includes the 2026 World Cup, at $13 billion, revised up from an initial projection of $11 billion, and 72% higher than the previous revenue cycle. Of that total, FIFA is estimated to have generated $8.9 billion from the Cup itself in revenue from TV rights ($3.92 billion), sponsorships ($2.69 billion), ticket sales ($3.1 billion), licensing rights, and other sources. A joint study by FIFA and the World Trade Organization estimates that the World Cup will contribute over $40 billion to global GDP, including nearly $14 billion in direct visitor spending in the three host countries (but principally in the United States, which hosted the lion’s share of the matches). The FIFA World Cup is now reportedly “the single most lucrative recurring commercial property in global sport.” And yet, notwithstanding the Trump government’s uses of the World Cup for sports anti-diplomacy, and the climate of anxiety that this created for participants and spectators, diplomacy that did not depend upon governments was able to thrive at the World Cup. Examples of successful people-to-people diplomacy were legion, as citizens of towns and cities across the States, as well as in Mexico and Canada, welcomed team members, their families and supporters, to training sites across North America. Fans of different teams joined together in person in stadiums for matches, at watch parties and bars, and at welcome events sponsored by host cities. The joy and camaraderie shared between the citizenry of Boston and Scotland’s “Tartan Army” of fans is but one example of how the “Beautiful Game” brings people together. Friendships forged across continents are likely to endure well beyond the Cup final. Even those achievements cannot be seen as unalloyed, however. As South African football fan Byron Pillay commented to Al Jazeera, “Football is called the Beautiful Game for a reason, for its ability to unite people. But it’s hard to believe in that magic with the politics and war rhetoric off the field of play, especially when one of the tournament hosts is central to that.” Ultimately, the experience of the 2026 FIFA World Cup illustrates that, as international sport is inextricably entangled with diplomacy of different sorts, for good or ill, it cannot be considered to be in the purely private realm and left to revenue-maximizing private actors. As long as there is the possibility of diplomatic progress in mediating estrangement between governments or between peoples, there is a broad and overarching public interest in international sport. Likewise, as it would be difficult to put on an international sport mega-event without international sporting organizations like FIFA and the International Olympic Committee (IOC), global media firms, and companies purchasing sponsorships, public and private interests in international sport must coexist, most likely somewhere on a shifting spectrum between partnership and rivalry or cross purposes. As the World Cup wraps up, the IOC needs to consider its lessons before the scheduled 2028 Los Angeles Olympics if they want to avoid a media-hyped Trump version of the 1936 Berlin Olympiad. The IOC and the National Olympic Committees need to set conditions on and make demands of Trump’s government with clearly articulated consequences for non-compliance, up to and including cancellation of the Games. Time is running out for the IOC, as unlike with the FIFA World Cup, there is no at-the-ready alternate venue for Los Angeles.
White House touts Trump speech as Democrats warn of recycled falsehoods
The speech marks the president’s latest push to deny his 2020 election loss and rally support for stricter voter ID and citizenship rules.
ICYMI: Sen. Banks Joins The Evening Edit on Fox Business Network
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Yesterday, Senator Jim Banks (R-Ind.) joined The Evening Edit with Elizabeth MacDonald on Fox Business Network to discuss the debate over birthright citizenship and his Citizenship Act of 2026. Click the image above for the full discussion. Key Excerpts: Sen. Jim Banks (R-Ind.): “It’s very simple, I am taking a page right out of Justice Kavanaugh’s playbook in his concurring opinion […]
Wolford v. Lopez rightly arms permit holders, business owners
t Last week, I wrote about the birthright citizenship case, one of several major Supreme Court decisions handed down over the past few weeks. Today, I want to look at what is probably the second most controversial decision, and one surrounded by a great deal of confusion and misinformation.
A small group of citizens rally for mental health coverage in Detroit
Detroit therapists and advocates protest insurance policy changes that could limit patient access to mental health.
They harvest the nation’s food, but a new rule may strip them of health insurance
Seasonal work. Inconsistent hours. Frequent moves. Cash payments and informal jobs. For farmworkers who rely on Medicaid, these common employment patterns could put their health coverage at risk. It’s a heightened concern for the estimated million-plus farmworkers who are U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents, as new work requirements kick in for the federal-state healthcare […]
How to Watch the 2026 Home Run Derby: Time, Streaming, Participants and Format
The 2026 Home Run Derby is Monday at Citizens Bank Park, streaming exclusively on Netflix. Here's the time, the field and the new swing-based format.
They harvest the nation’s food, but a new rule may strip them of health insurance
Seasonal work. Inconsistent hours. Frequent moves. Cash payments and informal jobs. For farmworkers who rely on Medicaid, these common employment patterns could put their health coverage at risk. It’s a heightened concern for the estimated million-plus farmworkers who are U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents, as new work requirements kick in for the federal-state healthcare […]
Politics Unplugged (Full Episode) July 12, 2026
Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes talks about the DOJ threats to prosecute election workers for allowing non-citizens to vote – even though there are no documented cases of that happening, going back decades. Plus, we talk with Katherine Haley, a Republican candidate for Treasurer. Then, consultants Dawn Penich and Wes Gullett talk about the impact of Turning Point USA, as a Republican lawmaker accuses a leader of the group of racism.
Politics Unplugged (Full Episode) July 12, 2026
Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes talks about the DOJ threats to prosecute election workers for allowing non-citizens to vote – even though there are no documented cases of that happening, going back decades. Plus, we talk with Katherine Haley, a Republican candidate for Treasurer. Then, consultants Dawn Penich and Wes Gullett talk about the impact of Turning Point USA, as a Republican lawmaker accuses a leader of the group of racism.
The winning tune: Music school awarded $10K prize
PHILADELPHIA -- Before delivering her final pitch to judges and attendees at the MLB All-Star Small Business Luncheon at Citizens Bank Park, Shana Pistilli, founder and executive director of the Rubato School of Music and winner of the 2026 MLB & Mastercard Small Business Contest, wanted to talk about one
From libertarian dream to political weapon: How the far right appropriated the crypto wave
Leaders such as Trump, Milei and Bukele raise these assets as a banner to attract disenchanted citizens while profiting from their popularity
Azerbaijan health officials deny mumps epidemic in Baku
The Ministry of Health of the Republic of Azerbaijan reports posts have been circulating on social networks about the widespread spread of epidemic mumps in Baku do not reflect the current epidemiological situation. Health officials say the epidemiological situation of mumps in the country is stable. The registered cases of infection consist of individual sporadic cases, no epidemics or mass spread have been recorded. The current situation is constantly under epidemiological surveillance by relevant medical institutions, and the necessary preventive and counter-epidemic measures are consistently implemented. Epidemic mumps is observed more often among unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated individuals. The disease is transmitted mainly by airborne droplets - during coughing, sneezing and close contact. The incubation period usually lasts 11–23 days. The main symptoms of the disease are fever, swelling and pain in the parotid salivary glands, discomfort when chewing and swallowing, general weakness, headache and loss of appetite. In most cases, mumps is mild and results in complete recovery. However, in rare cases, certain complications may develop in unvaccinated adolescents and adults. Therefore, timely vaccination is of particular importance in preventing the disease. Subscribe to Outbreak News TV on YouTube In accordance with the National Vaccination Schedule in Azerbaijan, the combined measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine is administered to children at 12 months of age, with a booster dose at 6 years of age. The MMR vaccine is the most reliable and effective means of protection against mumps. The Ministry of Health recommends that parents check their children’s vaccination status. If for any reason the vaccination has been delayed or missed, it is recommended to contact the medical facility in your area of residence and consult a doctor. To protect yourself from the disease, it is recommended to follow preventive measures such as avoiding close contact with sick people, following personal hygiene rules, washing hands regularly, and frequently ventilating closed spaces. If you experience symptoms of the disease, avoid self-medication, seek medical attention, and do not return to work until you are fully recovered. Citizens are asked to refer only to official sources and not to believe or share unverified information circulating on social networks. Outbreak News Today is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe
A road trip to save democracy? These judges say it's worth a shot
Bipartisan judges are touring the Midwest to warn citizens about the dangers of a politicized judiciary.
Don Mattingly seemingly leaks Kyle Schwarber Home Run Derby participation
Philadelphia Phillies star Bryce Harper announced on Thursday that he’ll be part of the 2026 Major League Baseball Home Run Derby in his home ballpark at Citizens Bank Field. The Home Run Derby features a field of eight batters, and with Harper’s announcement, six of the participants are now known. And that number might be…
Trump to ask Supreme Court to rehear birthright citizenship case after 'insane decision'
Trump says he will immediately ask the Supreme Court for a rehearing on its 6-3 birthright citizenship ruling, calling the decision "absolutely insane."
Trump to seek Supreme Court rehearing on birthright citizenship
President Donald Trump said he would ask the Supreme Court to rehear a case over birthright citizenship, a longshot bid to undo a ruling that went against his administration.
Major League Baseball announces entertainment lineup for the 2026 All-Star Game in Philadelphia
Major League Baseball today announced the entertainment lineup for the 2026 MLB All-Star Game presented by Mastercard. Emmy, Grammy, Tony and Oscar winning artist Jennifer Hudson and GRAMMY winner Patti LaBelle will bookend the pregame festivities on Tuesday, July 14th, at Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia, delivering special musical performances.
It's possible to end corporate influence in politics
More than 15 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court removed limits on corporate political spending in its notorious Citizens United decision, ushering in an era of unprecedented influence by moneyed interests. As a result, a small group of ultrawealthy donors have skewed the political system to their advantage — and today, social scientists link the […]
Dave & Buster’s Entertainment, Inc. (PLAY)’s Traffic Is Coming Back, But Is It Enough?
Dave & Buster’s Entertainment, Inc. (NASDAQ:PLAY) is among the best get rich quick stocks to buy right now. On June 29, Citizens started coverage on Dave & Buster’s Entertainment, Inc. (NASDAQ:PLAY) with a Market Perform rating and without a price target. Despite its discounted valuation, the company appears fairly valued due to the limited visibility on […]
U.S. Citizens Announce They're 'Rooting For Belgium' Tonight
Multiple U.S. citizens have announced on social media that they are "rooting for Belgium" on Monday night. The U.S. men's national team is taking on Belgium in the Round of 16. The Americans are in the middle of a World Cup controversy. FIFA has suspended the red card issued to star striker Folarin ...
Courts, citizenship and Alabama’s political test
This week’s "The Voice of Alabama Politics" examines citizenship, constitutional enforcement, death penalty clemency and voter turnout as Alabama’s political stakes sharpen in 2026.
Politics Unplugged (Full Episode) July 5, 2026
State Senator Analise Ortiz discusses No Safe Seats, an effort to raise money for progressive Democrats who are challenging establishment Democrats in the state. Plus, former Democratic lawmaker Reginald Bolding and Republican businesswoman Christine Jones discuss the Supreme Court ruling upholding birthright citizenship. Then, Reginald and Christine talk about the Department of Justice investigation into Senator Roben Gallego.
Joe Heller: Cartoonist's views of news - Fireworks politics, birthright citizenship, it's HOT, wide open spaces
Joe Heller was the editorial cartoonist for the Green Bay Press-Gazette in Green Bay, Wis., from 1985 until being laid off in July 2013. He still draws several cartoons a week and distributes them through his own syndicate. Through Heller Syndication, his cartoons regularly appear in more than 400 newspapers, making him the most successful...
Thomas Jefferson’s Embrace of Intelligent Design
Today on Independence Day, it is appropriate to review the sources of our rights as citizens.
Author, mental health advocate Kendall Concini-Moore creates experiences, not just books
“The Cloudy Day Chronicles” picture book series helps parents navigate tough feelings with their children while providing resources to help the conversation continue.
Comedy saved Teruko Nakajima. Her ‘Made in America’ is saving others
From Cedars-Sinai psych ward to Upright Citizens Brigade stage, Teruko Nakajima turns a doctor’s “prescription” for comedy into an one-woman show.
Mamdani blasts ICE agents, Elon Musk and 'supremacy' in America 250 speech ahead of July 4 weekend
Zohran Mamdani blasted Elon Musk, ICE and oligarchs in a fiery America 250 speech flanked by naturalized citizens ahead of July 4 weekend.
Governor Moore Announced Energy Assistance To Lower Utility Bills for 200,000 Maryland Households, Wrote On How To Improve Young Men’s Mental Health, Applauded SCOTUS Decision To Uphold Birthright Citizenship, And A Local Farmer Said ‘Gov. Moore Takes Action For Farmers’
This past week, Governor Wes Moore announced energy assistance programs to help lower utility bills for 200,000 Maryland households, published an opinion piece on how to improve young men’s mental health, applauded the SCOTUS decision to uphold birthright citizenship, and a local farmer applauded his work to secure a USDA Secretarial Disaster Declaration. Governor Moore […]
Trump's 'hero' justice offers roadmap after Supreme Court rejects birthright order
Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence outlines how Congress could legislatively restrict birthright citizenship, sparking immediate Republican action.
How Roberts led a fractured Supreme Court to wins for the right and defeats for Trump
In President Trump's second year back in the White House, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and the court punctured his claim to have power with no limits.
Immigration activists react to Supreme Court decisions
The court upheld the principle of birthright citizenship for all, but enabled restricting asylum seeking and revoking temporary protected status.
Negotiations between Cherriots, business leaders paused after months of meetings
Talks between the Salem Area Mass Transit District and representatives from a coalition of six business and real estate groups, and citizens were halted last week, Cherriots said in a press release. The two groups formed a task force to find a compromise after a proposed payroll tax sparked frustration last year. To comment on this story, use the form at the end of the report.
Bonus 236: A Term of Self-Inflicted Wounds
Within minutes of the Supreme Court handing down the birthright citizenship ruling on Tuesday and rising for its summer recess, its defenders were pointing to that decision (alongside the late-arriving mail-in ballots ruling on Monday and the tariffs ruling from February) as decisive proof that the Court really is “above politics,” and that criticisms of the justices for behaving more like politicians in robes than like judges are thus unfair. For a particularly thoughtful version of this claim, see Professor Will Baude’s opening response to the latest New York Times written roundtable about the Court with Baude, Professor Kate Shaw, and me. In that roundtable, I already offered one of the two major arguments against this thesis—that it’s an assessment of the numerator without regard to the denominator, and that a full account of the Court’s behavior throughout OT2025 suggests that the Court behaved even more politically during the current term than during even the previous (highly politicized) one. Just to take one of many data points, last term (OT2024), there were six rulings in argued cases in which all six Republican-appointed justices were in the majority and all three of the Democratic appointees were in dissent (along with a slew of such rulings on the emergency docket). This term, there were … 13. (Along with two 6-3 summary reversals and 10 rulings on the emergency docket from which the three Democratic appointees all dissented.) Today’s bonus issue addresses the flip side of that coin. In particular, below the fold, I identify four different moments in which the justices could have acted in ways to specifically defuse charges of political behavior—and opted instead to lean all the way in. As much as end-of-term narratives focus on what the Court did, and on the takeaways from individual rulings, consider today’s post an attempt to identify opportunities that the Court missed, as well. At least in the examples discussed below, by opting for the outcome that made the Court look more transparently political, the Court inflicted a series of (unnecessary) credibility wounds on itself. For those who aren’t paid subscribers, we’ll be back Monday with our regular coverage of the Court. For those who are, please read on.
Great-grandson of Wong Kim Ark praises Supreme Court ruling affirming birthright citizenship
The great-grandson of Wong Kim Ark, the Chinese American at the center of the U.S. Supreme Court case that established the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship, called Tuesday’s ruling a victory for all Americans, saying it reaffirmed that precedent.
After Supreme Court ruling, Republicans propose banning pregnant foreigners
The proposals follow Tuesday's Supreme Court decision to uphold birthright citizenship
Divided Supreme Court affirms birthright citizenship
The court rejected Trump’s attempt to end the guarantee that all children born on US soil are citizens
NJBIA to Honor Kim Guadagno with Caren Franzini Leadership Award at NJ Women Business Leaders Forum
Kim Guadagno, a trailblazer who served as New Jersey’s first Lieutenant Governor and later continued her public service in nonprofit leadership, will be honored with the Caren Franzini Leadership Award at the 12th Annual Women Business Leaders Forum, powered by Citizens and presented by NJBIA, on Sept. 23 and 24 in Atlantic City. The Women[...]
Trump’s audacious bid to end birthright citizenship was not an entire loss at the Supreme Court
When President Donald Trump used his black Sharpie on his first day back in office to sign an executive order in January 2025 limiting birthright citizenship, he said, “This is a big one.”
Advocates, legal experts react to key SCOTUS decisions
The court upheld both birthright citizenship amid an executive order by President Donald Trump to dial it back,
Advocates, legal experts react to key SCOTUS decisions
The court upheld both birthright citizenship amid an executive order by President Donald Trump to dial it back,
Trump shifts strategy after major defeat on birthright citizenship
WATCH: Angel mom turns tables on sanctuary politicians with basic question about their priorities
Jessica Gorman told lawmakers her daughter Sheridan “was not a talking point" as she accused sanctuary city leaders of failing to protect American citizens.
Jonathan Turley: This is a court that follows principle, not politics
Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley argues that the Supreme Court’s upholding of birthright citizenship showcases its integrity and independence on ‘Special Report.’
New York immigration advocates laud birthright citizenship ruling
The 6-3 decision came down Tuesday morning.
Trump calls on Congress to end birthright citizenship after court defeat
The Supreme Court's ruling in the birthright citizenship case poses a political challenge for President Donald Trump.
Amy Coney Barrett Faces Right-Wing Ire Over Recent Rulings
Justice Barrett sided with Chief Justice Roberts and the liberal minority to uphold birthright citizenship and mail-in voting practices.
Palace Theater and Downtown Gallatin offer July entertainment
Historic Downtown Gallatin, Inc. and the Palace Theater continue to offer plenty of entertainment and shopping choices to Gallatin citizens, both inside the air-conditioned theater and outside in the July heat. The Kids Summer Movie Series continues all month on Fridays from 10 a.m. until noon. July 3 will feature 2025’s “How to Train Your
Republicans float new ideas to restrict birthright citizenship after ruling
GOP House Speaker Mike Johnson said birthright citizenship has been "overused and abused"
Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship, rejecting Trump’s proposed limits
WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a broad conception of birthright citizenship, rejecting President Donald Trump’s executive order declaring that children born to people who are in the United States illegally or temporarily are not American citizens. The justices relied on a long-settled understanding of the 14th Amendment, adopted after the […]
Supreme Court rejects Trump's plan to limit birthright citizenship
The justices said Trump may not revise the Constitution and change citizenship laws in an executive order.
Supreme Court strikes down limits on party spending in federal elections
The court’s 2010 Citizens United decision opened the door to unlimited independent spending in federal elections.
Supreme Court upholds principle that almost all born on U.S. soil are American
If the court had struck down birthright citizenship and upheld President Donald Trump’s executive order, the ruling would have had sweeping political, economic and social ramifications.
Supreme Court strikes down Trump's order limiting birthright citizenship
The justices relied on a long-settled understanding of the 14th Amendment
Supreme Court rejects Trump attempt to limit birthright citizenship
The Trump administration sought to upend the historical understanding of the 14th Amendment, which has long been interpreted to extend birthright citizenship broadly.
Fact-checking the Trump administration's challenges to birthright citizenship
Until President Donald Trump, few saw it as controversial.
Supreme Court could rule on birthright citizenship, transgender sports cases today
The Supreme Court is expected to release decisions on birthright citizenship and laws barring transgender girls and women from participating in school sports teams.
The Latest: Supreme Court is set to rule on Trump’s challenge to birthright citizenship
The Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality of President Donald Trump’s order on birthright citizenship declaring that children born to parents who are in the United States illegally or temporarily are not American citizens.
Supreme Court to rule on birthright citizenship and rights of transgender athletes
The Supreme Court will hand down the final opinions of its term today. Follow for live news updates.
Trump unloads after Supreme Court upholds late mail-in ballots in Mississippi
Trump slams Supreme Court ruling allowing late mail-in ballots, demands Congress pass the SAVE Act requiring voter ID and proof of citizenship.
Supreme Court will weigh Trump-backed Republican push to revive Arizona voting laws
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Monday it will consider a Republican push to enforce strict Arizona voting laws passed in the swing state after the 2020 election. The high court has allowed some similar rules to take effect temporarily before, including Arizona's proof-of-citizenship requirement for state and local elections and a Virginia purge of voter rolls that the state said was aimed at keeping noncitizens from voting. READ MORE: Supreme Court rejects Trump's
Supreme Court to review the legality of mass voter purges in the weeks before an election
The Supreme Court will review the legality of mass voters purges in the final weeks before an election, as part of a larger case the justices are taking up examining the methods Arizona uses to keep non-citizens off the voter rolls.
Dave & Buster's Entertainment (NASDAQ:PLAY) Earns Market Perform Rating from Analysts at Citizens Jmp
Citizens Jmp began coverage on Dave & Buster's Entertainment in a report on Monday. They set a "market perform" rating for the company.
Supreme Court issues opinions
Major rulings are anticipated this week in cases involving presidential power, birthright citizenship and transgender rights.
Rock Creek Entertainment District under siege in new lawsuit
A citizens group has sued to block Norman's $1.1 billion Rock Creek Entertainment District, alleging constitutional and Open Meetings Act violations.
Trump likely to ‘lose’ on birthright citizenship case, political analyst says
Fox News senior political analyst Juan Williams discusses the Supreme Court set to issue a ruling on birthright citizenship on ‘Special Report.’
Discovery Education Earns Five 2026 CODiE Award Nominations Spanning Math, Science, Digital Citizenship, and Immersive Learning
Discovery Education Earns Five 2026 CODiE Award Nominations Spanning Math, Science, Digital Citizenship, and Immersive Learning
Making Our Own Luck
We are cross-posting a piece that former NIH official Kris Willis wrote for Macroscience. Kris is now the President and Founder of the Woodley Park Institute, for which I’m a board member. Picking winners or hedging bets? Federal science agencies have long wrestled with the question of how to ensure their billions of dollars of grants and contracts result in maximum benefits for Americans. On the surface, it might seem that a goal-oriented, interventionist style of management would be the best policy: prioritize our most pressing problems and distribute funding accordingly.This top-down strategy creates a unique hazard, though: bad choices can send resources in the wrong direction, resulting in slow progress that impedes the delivery of tangible benefits to citizens. Moreover, if decision makers pursue an applied advance when the underlying scientific principles remain poorly understood, they risk costly failures and a loss of support for the research enterprise at large. Examples include Nixon’s 1971 War on Cancer, undertaken on the premise that a cure could be achieved in less than a decade, the drive to build an operational commercial fusion plant by the mid-1990s, and the National Plan to Address Alzheimer’s Disease, which failed to produce the effective treatments and prevention strategies promised by 2025. The contrasting laissez-faire approach is to hedge your bets. If the path to an advance is impossible to predict, then the wisest choice might be to distribute funding to as widely as possible. The main risk of this strategy is that spreading funding thinly may limit the resources available to the most promising research, resulting in the same negative outcomes as the interventionist approach: limited support for the most promising topics, slow progress, and delayed returns. In reality, at science agencies like the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health, program managers navigate between these two extremes, setting some funds aside to target high-priority areas and using the rest to cover the widest possible range of meritorious proposals. This middle path seems like the most rational way to proceed, but it still requires making choices. How much should be set aside for high priority topics? What should those topics be? How should we define merit? Expert opinion can provide a helpful guide, but leading experts can have remarkably different opinions about what matters and what should be prioritized. Moreover, experts and administrators alike can be risk averse, giving an edge to high-profile, well-established concepts. What’s really needed is a data-driven framework to help guide decision-making, one that doesn’t simply repackage prestige or incumbency. Recognizing breakthroughs years in advance Many breakthroughs fail to attract funding or recognition at the earliest stages of development. Katalin Karikó, for example, spent years struggling to win grants for work on mRNA that would eventually win her and Drew Weissman a Nobel Prize. Similar stories can be told about Jim Allison’s groundbreaking studies leading to the development of cancer immunotherapy, Stan Pruisner’s demonstration that prions can self-replicate without DNA, or Robin Warren and Barry Marshall’s proof that Helicobacter pylori, not stress, causes ulcers. Yet at some point, the scientific community recognizes and responds to transformative breakthroughs like these. How does that change happen? And what if science funders could identify the areas that are on the cusp of a breakthrough? Those questions led my collaborators and me to study how scientists responded to past breakthroughs. Based on patterns in that data, we developed a means of predicting future breakthroughs, using biomedicine as a proof of concept. It’s worth taking a moment to describe how our approach works. Briefly, our prediction process begins by grouping the 18 million or so peer-reviewed papers in PubMed, the authoritative database of biomedical research, into roughly 50,000 unique topics. A small subset of these topics are so widely acclaimed as breakthroughs that they have been recognized with a major prize like a Nobel or a Lasker Award. We theorized that studying the development of these outliers over time, especially before they gained acclaim, was the key to identifying future instances of them. After defining topics, we chose 21 representative breakthroughs and asked what they looked like before they won prestigious prizes. To answer that question, we re-ran our topic-mapping algorithm repeatedly, winding back the clock one year each time, stringing together the years to follow the progress of each field as it grew and advanced. We found that in each case, the years leading up to a discovery followed a pattern: a burst of papers on a new, rapidly evolving topic, many of which quickly became influential. These characteristics—the percent of papers that are new, the percentage of papers that are brought in from other topics, and the influence of each individual paper—can all be measured separately for any given topic. Together, they act as a predictive signal that is detectable an average of five years before a transformative discovery is made, and up to thirty years before the discovery receives a major prize. Scanning the current research landscape for topics that display this signal allows us to predict what work will likely produce a future breakthrough. Each year we analyzed includes four or five signals, a number that appears to have remained constant across a twenty year time frame. In their classic work on the sociology of science, Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar established that the desire to participate in a major discovery is an important motivator for scientists as they consider whether they should take up (or abandon) a research problem. Although further work is needed, the simplest explanation for our results is that this behavior is widespread enough to detect at scale. A foundational advance, or something like it, draws the attention of scientists and causes them to change the direction of their research. They vote with their feet, staking their own reputation and careers by publishing on and citing the new idea. That upswell of interest is the foundation of our breakthrough signal. What kind of research does our model identify as a breakthrough? After building a model based on the patterns in our 21 preselected breakthroughs, we tested it by identifying all early signals of discovery from 1994 through 1997. Of the 18 signals we found in that time period, 17 can be traced forward in time to a breakthrough. Examples include super-resolution fluorescence microscopy (see the image above), the directed evolution of proteins and enzymes (Chemistry Nobel, 2018), and sequencing the human genome (National Medal of Science, 2008). The discovery of the role of leptin signaling in obesity is a particularly interesting case study. Around 1950, scientists noticed the existence of a type of lab mouse that suffered from a unique inherited form of obesity. When given the freedom to choose their own diet, these mice ate more than normal and preferred food that was high in fat. Researchers had few clues as to why the animals overate; early experiments pointed to the existence of a soluble ob factor found circulating in the bloodstream that regulated appetite, but its identity was unknown. In 1994, Jeffrey Friedman and colleagues identified and sequenced the ob gene, noting that the protein it encoded appeared to fit the profile of a circulating factor. A year later, a trio of high-profile publications demonstrated that ob was a hormone that regulated body weight and fat deposition by regulating appetite. One of these was co-authored by Friedman, who christened it leptin from the ancient Greek word for thin. Using our model, the data from 1996 make it clear this advance would become a breakthrough. Scientists had flocked to study the biology of the new hormone, generating the flurry of new papers and citations required to produce a signal. One of these demonstrated that serum leptin concentrations reflected the amount of adipose tissue in the human body, providing clinical validation of the earlier mouse studies. Before the identification of leptin, scientists were unable to point to a specific molecule that controlled appetite and adiposity, so that it was impossible to rule out non-physiological causes of obesity; its characterization fundamentally changed our concept of weight gain. In 2010, Friedman and fellow pioneer Douglas Coleman were awarded a Lasker for the discovery. Our work also identifies breakthroughs in clinical practice and behavioral and social sciences, even though these areas are less likely to draw the attention of major prize committees. One example that falls into this category is the introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair, a minimally invasive surgical procedure for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm, a leading cause of death among Americans over the age of 65. Relative to the previous standard of care, it reduces in-hospital mortality by almost four-fold. In 2017, Timothy Chuter received the American College of Surgeons’ prestigious Jacobsen Innovation award for his multiple refinements to the technique. Another under-recognized breakthrough identified by our model is the development of standardized survey instruments to assess the quality of life for HIV+ patients. The antiretroviral cocktails introduced in the mid-1990s reduced AIDS mortality, but treatment came with serious side effects. The new evaluations showed that patients whose disease progressed had worse physical functioning than Americans with other chronic diseases, while those who were asymptomatic maintained a health-related quality of life on par with the overall US population. This evidence made it possible for patients and activists to argue that even in the absence of a total cure, and in spite of the side effects, alleviation of symptoms was a worthwhile priority for clinicians. My colleagues and I have failed to identify any significant recognition for the physicians and health policy experts who pioneered this advance, although in 2016, researchers called for the World Health Organization to set targets for good health-related quality of life as part of its framework to end the AIDS pandemic. From forecasting to funding How should science funders use our predictions? Any serious discussion of what we should do with this new capability needs to begin with an understanding of its limitations. We can’t (and shouldn’t) invest all of our resources in the small number of topics predicted to produce breakthroughs. Innovative new fields are born from existing ones; they rarely arise de novo. If funders don’t maintain a diverse portfolio, the breakthroughs of tomorrow will have no antecedents. Think of this as eating the seed corn, or killing the goose that lays the golden egg. There are also multiple goals of funding beyond basic scientific discovery, including translating discoveries into clinical practice, developing new technologies, supporting economic development, and training new scientists. The investments needed to accomplish these goals are likely different from those required to support emerging breakthroughs. Finally, we must be aware that we may not capture every instance of a breakthrough. The concept is fuzzy, and not every significant discovery is recognized with a major award. Further, breakthroughs are rare, meaning that our dataset is, by necessity, small. This makes formal estimates of accuracy challenging. Although our overall success rate appears to be high, any one signal may turn out to be a false positive. We found one apparent example: the development of the third generation COX-2 inhibitors, Vioxx and Celebrex, which were much celebrated in the early 2000s as effective but non-addictive pain relievers, meets all the algorithmic criteria of a breakthrough. Five years after it received FDA approval, researchers demonstrated that Vioxx was associated with serious cardiovascular complications, and the manufacturer voluntarily pulled the drug from the market. Celebrex remains available, although like other NSAIDs, it carries an FDA warning for increased cardiovascular risk. Decision makers who were overly focused on the breakthrough potential of this research might have wasted substantial resources nurturing an area that ultimately proved to be a failure—but so would those who relied on expert opinion at the time. That said, the potential benefits of funding the next mRNA vaccine or cancer immunotherapy years earlier than we might have are large. When we can’t assume the outcome of an action, it’s worth conducting an experiment. Can targeted support for areas that are poised to produce a breakthrough increase the return on scientific investment without cannibalizing future advances? With the necessary administrative infrastructure in place, conducting this experiment would be straightforward. First, identify all the breakthrough signals between 2018 and 2023, select half at random, and commit to a decade of investment. For biomedicine, a six year window should yield about 30 topics with the potential to produce a breakthrough. Providing strong support to half of these might be accomplished for $300 million a year. That’s roughly half of the recent annual budget of the NIH Common Fund or around 20% of the fiscal year 2025 budget for ARPA-H. After five years, then again at ten, compare to see which group — the one that was actively managed, or the control — produced more breakthroughs, and on what timescale. Although we used biomedicine as an example, the same experiment could just as well be run for physics, materials science, or any other discipline. Any attempt to undertake such an experiment should keep three points top of mind. First, we can predict the topic of future breakthroughs, but the people and vision for how to move the work forward are still important. In practice, this means success requires active program managers with the expertise to develop the science and the authority to do so, including by recruiting investigators. Second, we would be wise to learn from the failures of past attempts to fund transformative research. High among these are funding modestly repackaged work, confusing the genuinely novel with the merely unfamiliar, and relying too much on incumbent investigators. All of these risks can be mitigated by thoroughly and intelligently integrating high quality data into portfolio management. Finally, we need to have patience. Even with strong funding support, producing a breakthrough takes time. If supporting breakthroughs is the best way to nurture the birth of new fields, we also need to accurately describe and properly manage the other two stages, so that we invest wisely throughout the productive lifetime of ideas and divest once they reach the point of diminishing returns. We would benefit from more study of all of these phases, especially the transition from one to another. More research could answer questions like: When does a breakthrough become an established field? How do the availability of funding, the size and characteristics of the available workforce, and the accumulation of evidence that disagrees with prevailing models affect a field’s decline? Exactly how do old ideas give birth to new ones, and can we speed up the process? The more we understand about the dynamics of scientific progress, the better we can maximize the odds that our curiosity leads to results. I’d call that finding a way to make our own luck.
How should European scientists respond to the US AI kill switch?
Earlier in June, Europe’s worst fears of technological dependence were confirmed when the White House ordered the AI firm Anthropic to stop non-US citizens using its leading models. This kill-switch moment crystalised anxieties in Brussels that the continent, lagging the US on the creation of leading-edge AI models, is now a technological of vassal of Washington. The shock has specific implications for European scientists and universities. Some governments are now worried that with AI being integrated into labs, Donald Trump now has his finger hovering over an off switch for European science. “Having restrictions on this tool, it can have an impact on our own research,” said France’s research minister, Philippe Baptiste, at the VivaTech conference in Paris on June 18.Baptiste, himself a former academic, said that colleagues in mathematics had recently warned him they were now cut off from leading-edge US models, risking their work. “This model is not available anymore now because of the US restriction, and for the first time this had an impact on mathematics,” a field where large language models (LLMs) are making a significant contribution, said Baptiste. So, should European scientists avoid relying on US models in the future? Or would this be a self-harming overreaction? And how is AI being used in science, anyway? What happened?On June 12, it emerged that Washington, citing cybersecurity concerns, had ordered Anthropic to stop non-US citizens using two models: Claude Mythos 5, and Claude Fable 5, a version of Mythos but with guardrails to prevent abuse. Anthropic said Washington’s concerns were overblown. But forced to follow the order, yet with no way to check who was using the models, the company suddenly shut down access for everyone, US citizens included. There’s still no agreement on how to restore broad access. But last week, Bloomberg reported that select US companies, and the US government, still had access to Mythos despite the ban, but the EU’s cybersecurity agency Enisa had been shut out. Class division of researchersIn the longer term, access outside the US should be restored, said Marcel Salathé, co-director of the AI centre at the Federal Polytechnic School of Lausanne (EPFL), because a permanent restriction would be financially ruinous to US AI firms. “Even Trump will eventually budge to economic pressure,” he said.However, US AI firms might end up operating rather like banks, doing due diligence on users of their leading-edge AI models, he went on.European scientists are unlikely to fall foul of such checks, he said. But having a Chinese postgraduate in their lab, or doing a type of research the US disapproved of, could potentially result in access being denied. “It will create a sort of class division of researchers,” he said. More than frontier modelsHowever, successfully deploying AI in science is about far more than just having access to leading LLMs such as Mythos.Instead, many science-specific tools, most famously Alphafold, which predicts protein folding structures, require “far less” computing power to train than frontier models, well within the capabilities of European supercomputers, according to a recent analysis by the Arq Foundation, a Brussel-based AI think tank. Instead, tools such as Alphafold are possible because certain fields, like protein folding, weather prediction or astronomy, have large, clean, standardised datasets that can be used to train predictive models. Rather than compute, “data is the central constraint for AI for science,” the report says. For example, a less powerful physics model trained on CERN’s data “will be more valuable than the best model without certain data,” said Bengüsu Özcan, author of the report. European advantage?Europe could therefore steal a march by using its scientific data and infrastructure to create models US digital giants cannot. “They might actually match or go even beyond what these big [US] companies are doing,” said Özcan.Indeed, some European start-ups hope to create automated testing labs to create the kind of standardised data that could speed up the discovery of new materials. Materials scientists say there’s currently too little data to train models. AI scientistsHowever, even if the bottleneck for AI in science is often data, rather than compute, being at the mercy of the US for LLM access could still become a problem for European scientists. A new class of “AI scientists” based on leading LLMs is also emerging, Özcan’s report says.Unlike domain-specific tools like Alphafold, these try to automate day-to-day scientific work, by providing an overarching tool that coordinates specific models to synthesise existing literature, generate hypotheses or run analysis of data. The problem for Europe, however, is that these tools are sometimes based on US leading models. Google Deepmind’s AI Co-Scientist, for example, is built on Google’s Gemini LLM. Systematic failureThese scientific automation tools are still in their early stages, and still exhibit “systematic failures on scientific tasks,” Özcan’s report says. One of the problems is that the messy, day-to-day process of scientific discovery is largely not documented, meaning LLMs don’t have a good source of data to learn how scientists actually work. Meanwhile, some tasks, such as literature synthesis, don’t typically require access to leading edge models.However, the performance of AI scientific assistants could improve as companies such as Google pour resources into developing them. Rely on US“Unfortunately, for scientific assistants, there is not much we can do right now except rely on US frontier AI,” said Antoine Bosselut, a natural language processing expert based at EPFL. Chinese-built open models, which can run on local computers, lessening the risk of a shutdown, are touted as one alternative to US dependence. There’s also Mistral, once seen as Europe’s main AI hope, but the Paris-based company has seen its recent models fall behind in performance. But the Chinese alternatives are generally not as capable as US frontier AI models, said Bosselut, unless paired with fiddly, custom tools that allows them to act as independent agents. “Most scientists do not have the time,” he said. Don’t jump ship yetAlthough the kill switch moment is seen a warning shot for European scientists, it doesn’t mean labs should abandon US AI tools immediately. “I do not think the right response is simply to abandon US-based models and systems under the banner of sovereignty or independence,” said Mattias Björnmalm, secretary general of the Cesaer university association. “That would be an overreaction.”Related articlesEuropean sovereignty in AI requires ‘ugly trade-offs,’ say experts Robotic lab start-up makes case for €500M EU-funded materials testing facilityAI in science: is it useful? Instead, European researchers need to ask themselves whether they’re becoming dependent on technology that could be turned off in Washington, said Özcan. “They might not see this today, but they should really start asking this question,” she said. European researchers need a plan B, said Salathé. “I would recommend to every researcher, very proactively explore alternatives.”Own toolsIn addition, Björnmalm and others want European research institutions to develop their own scientific AI tools.Instead of signing AI deals with US digital giants, European universities should be using this money to create their own models, which may end up being superior for research, said Sabine Leonelli, an expert on the use of AI in science at the Technical University of Munich. “Universities in Europe seem to be happy to sign commercial contracts with US companies on the assumption [their AI tools] are better,” she said. But US frontier LLMs are typically opaque, and have been developed without independent scientific input, she said. “This is not good enough for science.”Last year, Swiss researchers released Apertus, an LLM designed to be completely transparent, from its development methods to its training data. The idea is that this makes scientific tools built on top of the model far more reproducible than with closed, commercial alternatives.“Europe needs more of this: serious capacity-building that gives researchers, universities and companies credible options,” said Björnmalm.
Trump abruptly cancels signing housing bill, blindsiding Republicans
Trump is pressuring senators to focus on his proof-of-citizenship voting bill even though it doesn't have the votes to pass