IRBIL, Iraq (AP) — Drones carrying explosives targeted a city in northern Iraq where U.S. forces are stationed, and sirens rang out in Bahrain on Friday, hours after the American military said it finished its .

�ճ���� over the past week, as the U.S. pounded Iran while Tehran attacked ships in the  and targeted U.S. assets and allies in the region.

The strait, which is a crucial passage for the world’s energy supplies, is at the center of the latest fighting since Iranian attacks can effectively shut the waterway, sending fuel prices soaring worldwide and causing widespread economic turmoil. The Iranian-allied Houthi rebels added further pressure this week by targeting two Saudi tankers in the Red Sea, making good on a threat to cut off an alternative route for the region’s oil.

Despite the war’s unpopularity — and its widespread damage to Iran and the global economy — the latest round of fighting has no clear off-ramp. Iran’s Health Ministry said 55 people have been killed and over 600 wounded in strikes in recent weeks.

The U.S. and Israel  and have offered shifting goals for the war, including toppling Tehran’s government and eliminating its nuclear program. But the conflict has devolved into a fight for control of the strait — with Iran apparently hoping to win concessions by inflicting damage on the global economy and the U.S. trying to limit that damage.

US strikes sites across Iran and countries in the region are targeted

U.S.-led forces intercepted and shot down five explosive-laden drones Friday over Irbil, according to security officials in northern Iraq. No injuries or damage were reported.

An Associated Press journalist heard at least seven blasts in the city, the capital of Iraq’s semiautonomous Kurdish region, and saw at least four plumes of black smoke rising from areas near or inside a base at the city’s airport that hosts U.S. forces. Flights continued as normal at the airport, the state-run Iraqi News Agency reported, citing the facility’s director. U.S. military officials in Iraq did not respond to a request for comment.

In recent years, the U.S. maintained about 2,500 troops in Iraq for training and to conduct operations against the Islamic State group with Iraq’s military. Many of those have withdrawn, but a small contingent of military advisers and others remains — many of whom have moved to Irbil.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard urged people in neighboring countries to stay away from bases with American troops. The Guard said it had targeted the U.S. base in Udairi, Kuwait, setting ablaze three ammunition and storage sheds and destroying them. It also claimed to have struck a watchtower for the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain, which it said was damaged.

U.S. Central Command did not respond to inquiries about the claims. Bahrain said it intercepted and shot down Iranian aerial attacks on Friday, but did not say if there were any casualties or damage.

U.S. strikes hit a Revolutionary Guard naval base in northern Iran, the semiofficial news outlets Fars and ISNA reported. Blasts from U.S. bombardment overnight were also reported on Iran’s Qeshm Island, a base for naval assets including drone boats that Iran can use to attack vessels in , as well as in Isfahan province, home to a major Iranian air base and one of Iran’s nuclear sites.

More strikes reportedly hit Iran’s southwest Khuzestan province and southern Fars province.

Central Command said the latest barrage was designed to “further degrade Iran’s ability to threaten civilian mariners and commercial vessels transiting regional waters” as the Americans push to regain control over the strait, through which one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas transited in peacetime.

Houthis open a new front in the war

Iran’s ability to effectively close the strait — and thus cause economic chaos far beyond the Middle East — gives it tremendous leverage in any negotiations. Its  only increased that leverage when they targeted two Saudi oil tankers in the Red Sea on Thursday — increasing the risks of shipping through  Middle Eastern oil.

Brent crude, the international standard,  in the wake of the attacks, but dipped slightly on Friday to about $98. Gas prices in the U.S. ticked up to an average of $4.11 a gallon, AAA said.

The attacks made good on the  to close the  to Saudi-linked shipping. The strait at the southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula connects the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden, and around 12% of the world’s trade, including a fourth of global container traffic, passes through there.

That passage has become ever more crucial for Saudi Arabia, which has diverted millions of barrels of oil a day to its Red Sea port of Yanbu as a way of bypassing the Strait of Hormuz.

U.S. �ʰ���������Գ��� threatened “major military punishment” against the Houthis if their attacks on ships continue.

Trump threatens to use Iranian funds to pay for fixing ships damaged in the war

Trump also warned Iran over its attacks on ships, saying on social media Thursday that sanctioned Iranian funds in U.S. possession will be used to pay for fixing boats damaged in the war.

It was unclear what legal mechanisms Trump would use to access and spend the funds.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi condemned the suggestion, writing on X that “once governments normalize confiscation, no one’s assets are safe. Ensuing chaos will not be pretty or peaceful.”

There have been no public signs of progress in any negotiation efforts.

Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi of Iraq, which has close ties to both the U.S. and Iran, was in Tehran on Thursday after  in Washington. Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar of Pakistan, which has played a significant role in previous negotiations, met his Iranian counterpart, Abbas Araghchi, on Friday. Before the meeting, Araghchi appeared to brush off any attempts at mediation, saying he did not think the conflict needed more mediators, instead insisting the U.S. must change its position.

The International Maritime Organization says at least 6,000 mariners are stranded on about 400 vessels around the Strait of Hormuz.

The U.N. human rights chief, Volker Türk, called Friday for “urgent action” to help them. His office said the seafarers are exposed to the fighting and some have been abandoned by their ships’ owners, leaving them to “fend for themselves without food, water, fuel, medical care, electricity or means to communicate with their families.”

Iran says it has the right to manage traffic and potentially charge fees in the Strait of Hormuz, which was open to all toll-free before the war. It has attacked ships using a route through the strait that is overseen by U.S. forces and intended to be outside Tehran’s control.

Frankel reported from Jerusalem. Associated Press writers Bassem Mroue in Beirut, Munir Ahmed in Islamabad, and Jamey Keaten in Geneva contributed.

NEW YORK (AP) — Will President ’s name grace one of the most famous — and sometimes maligned — landmarks in his hometown of New York City?

The Republican administration this week urged leading U.S. Senators to rename Penn Station as it undertakes a redesign of the dreary, underground Manhattan transit hub that also happens to be the busiest in the western hemisphere.

But the U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, in a Wednesday letter seeking congressional funding approval for the rehab and other major transportation priorities, stopped short of saying what the station’s moniker should be changed to.

Spokespersons for the transportation agency provided the letter but didn’t respond to follow up questions Thursday.

Duffy has made it no secret he would welcome seeing his current boss’ name etched across the rail station’s facade.

“I imagine you’re asking, ’Is this going to be Trump Station?’ ” the former Wisconsin congressman as officials sought bids for the project����ap master developer. “I think that has a nice ring to it.”

Trump spokesperson Karoline Leavitt, when asked earlier this year, simply responded: “ ?”

In his second White House stint, the term-limited Republican has sought to burnish his legacy through public works projects, from a to and a failed attempt to . Earlier this month, Florida’s Palm Beach airport to the President Donald J. Trump International Airport.

Trump has said name change idea wasn’t his

Trump, for his part, has acknowledged a possible name change was floated in talks with the Senate’s top Democrat, U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, of New York.

But he at the notion that he suggested it in exchange for unfreezing federal funding for the , a major rail tunnel running under the Hudson River from Penn Station into New Jersey.

“Chuck Schumer suggested that to me, about changing the name of Penn Station to Trump Station,” Trump said earlier this year aboard Air Force One.

At the same time, he argued that it doesn’t make much sense for such a major New York landmark to be named after another state.

“I LOVE Pennsylvania, but it is a direct competitor to New York, and ‘eating New York’s lunch!’,” on his social media platform Truth Social as he stressed the renaming idea was “brought up by certain politicians and construction union heads, not me.”

New York’s Pennsylvania Station, like a handful of others in the country, is named after the Pennsylvania Railroad, the now defunct passenger rail company that built the once grand midtown station.

Opened in 1910, the original station was considered a marvel of the Beaux Arts style, with imposing, Roman-style columns and an expansive waiting area.

It was razed in 1963 to make way for Madison Square Garden, forcing commuters to navigate cramped corridors and dingy train platforms underneath the famous arena.

Recently released renderings call for a return to the hub’s original classical style, with a stone facade, rows of columns and a grand concourse with soaring ceilings. 0ne inside wall also bears Trump’s seal and name.

Critics slam name-change idea

U.S. Rep. Jerry Nadler, a Manhattan Democrat, said Duffy’s letter underscores how the Trump administration is “waging a hostile takeover of Penn Station” and seeking to “strip control” from local authorities.

“I strongly oppose this ridiculous proposal and am once again demanding answers on the funding,” he . “New York taxpayers and transit riders must not be forced to foot the bill for a Trump vanity project.”

The Riders Alliance, a local transit advocacy group, said the renaming idea was “another huge red flag” that the Penn Station project could become “another multibillion dollar vanity boondoggle.”

“We should be talking about improving service, saving time and money, not monuments, ribbon cuttings or nameplates,” spokesperson Danny Pearlstein said in a statement.

The Trump administration ordered Amtrak, the national passenger rail service, to of the massive redesign last year.

For years, the Penn Station project had been mired in political infighting among the local transit agencies that use the station. James Dolan, the billionaire owner of the NBA’s New York Knicks and NHL’s New York Rangers, has also strongly opposed any plans to relocate MSG.

The current plans would keep the famous arena, where Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce , but demolish a theater located on the site.

Spokespersons for Amtrak referred questions to the federal transportation department. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority and New Jersey Transit, which run trains from the station, didn’t immediately comment.

Follow Philip Marcelo at

, a nonprofit collection of faith leaders fighting for humane immigration policies, and a Weld County resident sued the town of Hudson and its Town Council, arguing the municipality must enforce its land development code as the federal government moves toward reopening a shuttered private prison for use as a 1,188-bed detention center.

The property, which the Alaska Department of Corrections used as a prison until it closed in 2013, is not zoned for use as a detention facility, the complaint states.

For it to be used in that capacity, the property owner must obtain approval through public processes outlined in Hudson’s code, Together Colorado alleges in the lawsuit, filed Wednesday in Weld County District Court.

“This case is about a basic proposition: Colorado and its cities and towns are not powerless. Hudson is not a bystander. The town has the authority and the obligation to act,” said David Seligman, executive director of the nonprofit law firm , and an attorney litigating the case. “The town is being told to hand over the keys and ask no questions. But Hudson’s obligation runs to the people, not to a billion-dollar prison company and its out-of-state landlord.”

The lawsuit comes 10 days after the private prison giant Geo Group announced it had signed a five-year contract with the Trump administration to reopen the shuttered prison as part of the president’s mass-deportation agenda.

The agreement — worth more than — will nearly double U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s detention capacity in Colorado. Geo operates ICE’s other Colorado immigration facility in Aurora, which can hold more than 1,500 detainees.

Geo has not said when the Hudson facility — to be called the Big Horn Contract Detention Center — would open, though its lease begins Aug. 1 and will last for 88 months, according to securities filings.

Hudson, a small town roughly 30 miles northeast of Denver, has been the site of repeated protests from community members opposing the government’s plans.

Bryce Lange, the town manager, told The Post on Thursday that the U.S. Constitution supersedes local zoning. Hudson, he said, will focus on what it can do — which is maintain roads, public safety and water for the area.

“The town zoning code cannot stop immigration enforcement,” Lange said.

But Together Colorado alleges Hudson has both a legal and moral obligation to follow its code.

The facility is located in an industrial zoning district, the lawsuit states, which does not include correctional facilities.

Before its prior period of operation as a prison, Hudson voters approved a conditional use permit for the property by ballot measure, the complaint says.

“GEO and ICE are not above the law,” Seligman said at a news conference Thursday outside Hudson’s town hall. “The town cannot put its head in the sand.”

He was joined by faith leaders from across Colorado, who spoke of this as a “moment of moral crisis for our country.” They held signs reading “no concentration camps in Colorado,” sang songs of freedom and bowed their heads in prayer.

“The foreigners who reside among us are not our enemies,” said Pastor Ben Konecny, a reverend at the First Congregational Church in Greeley. “These are our future doctors, future lawyers and future schoolteachers.”

The Trump administration is removing protections from the key places where endangered species live, saying states can keep the areas safe.

But experts say states aren’t equipped for the task.

Earlier this month, the Trump administration finalized a major change to the Endangered Species Act, rolling back protections for the forests, wetlands, deserts and other critical habitats that many plants and animals rely on.

The new rule will open many landscapes to development, logging, mining and oil and gas drilling. Wildlife officials — in both conservative and liberal states — had expressed strong concerns about the proposal, saying it would threaten their plans to safeguard endangered species.

But federal officials framed the decision as a move to give “freedom” to state leaders to manage wildlife without burdensome federal regulations.

States that wish to continue protecting habitats can do so under state law, the Interior Department and other federal agencies wrote in their lengthy new .

But legal experts and wildlife veterans say that almost no states have endangered species laws on the books that allow state officials to prevent habitat destruction in the name of saving wildlife.

While many states have laws to stop poaching and direct killing of wildlife, the protection of nesting trees, spawning streams and other resources has long fallen to the federal Endangered Species Act and the agencies that enforce it.

“It����ap not going to be a situation where the states can easily just jump in here and fill the void,” said Robert Anderson, who served as solicitor for the Department of the Interior during the Biden administration. “It����ap not going to help states, and it����ap going to make it worse for the species.”

Many wildlife experts also noted that state wildlife agencies are already underfunded as it is. Taking on the massive regulatory system that prevents developers and extractive industries from destroying critical habitat would require far more resources than those agencies have available.

A coalition of environmental groups and tribal nations have filed lawsuits challenging the federal rollback.

The ‘harm’ rule

On July 10, the federal departments of Interior and Commerce announced they had finalized a rule rescinding the longstanding definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act.

For decades, federal officials have scrutinized logging projects that would cut old-growth trees where owls build their nests, and agriculture operations that diverted water from streams where salmon return to spawn.

But now, the feds are pivoting to a much more limited definition of “harm.” Only actions that directly injure or kill the animals themselves will be considered a violation of endangered species law.

“You can destroy the resources a species requires as long as you don’t do it when the species is at home,” said Karrigan Börk, a law professor and director of the Center for Watershed Sciences at the UC Davis Institute of the Environment. “If you drain a salmon river during the summer when the salmon aren’t in it, ultimately it has the same impact of killing off that whole species.”

In its announcement, the Trump administration framed the move as restoring the “original intent” of the Endangered Species Act and reducing regulations that punished people for “indirect or speculative impacts” to wildlife.

The Interior Department did not respond to a Stateline interview request.

A published in Conservation Science and Practice of species added to the list of endangered species from 1975 to 2017 found that only 17% of them faced threats from direct killing, while 81% faced habitat loss.

“It����ap common sense that we can’t save a species unless we save the places that they live,” said Jane Davenport, senior attorney at Defenders of Wildlife, a nonprofit conservation group that is planning to sue the federal government over the change. “This is an attempted death blow to the Endangered Species Act.”

Some industry groups praised the move. The American Petroleum Institute and other oil and gas groups said in public comments that they supported the effort to limit habitat protections, but expressed concern that the Trump administration’s move to rescind the “harm” definition without issuing a new interpretation could allow a future president or the courts to issue a more expansive reading of the law.

The groups cited Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissenting opinion in a landmark 1995 case that upheld habitat protections under the Endangered Species Act.

“‘Harm’ must involve a direct injury to a particular animal,” the groups wrote, arguing that it “cannot result indirectly from habitat modification nor can the term apply to a population of animals.”

States’ role

In public comments after the rule was initially proposed, wildlife agency leaders from both liberal and conservative states said the change would be a blow to their conservation efforts.

The proposed rule would have “dire consequences,” wrote Bruce Kreft, chief of the conservation and communications division with the North Dakota Game and Fish Department. “Eliminating habitat protection will lead to further population declines and, ultimately, an increase in the number of species needing (Endangered Species Act) protection.”

Wildlife officials in Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, New Mexico, New Jersey, Vermont and Wyoming also expressed concern about the loss of habitat protections, as did the Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies, a nonprofit that represents state wildlife managers.

Of the public comments reviewed by Stateline, only Alaska’s wildlife agency leader offered wholehearted support for the change.

In response to those concerns, federal officials wrote in their rulemaking decision that the change “does not alter the ability of States to implement their own conservation programs or to regulate habitat impacts under State law.”

But wildlife experts say states cannot replicate the habitat protections that federal law provided. Although most states have their own state-level endangered species laws, they’re largely focused on poaching or direct killing of animals.

“The state-level endangered species acts are wildly variable in what they’re supposed to cover and are uniformly under-resourced and under-enforced, because the federal Endangered Species Act has been the real baseline since the 1970s,” said Börk, the UC Davis professor.

Chris Servheen, who served as grizzly bear recovery coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for 35 years, worked closely with state wildlife agencies in that position.

“It����ap really disingenuous to say if states want to protect habitat, they can do so,” he said. “That����ap not their role, that����ap not what they do. States manage the take (killing) of the animals directly related to hunting or trapping or something like that. The federal agencies manage the land base.”

According to a from the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators, only eight states plus Puerto Rico require the designation of critical habitats under their laws to protect endangered species.

California appears to be the only state with a process under state law to account for damage to wildlife habitat and require developers to offset those impacts, such as funding a restoration project nearby, said Becca Madsen, restoration economy director with the Environmental Policy Innovation Center.

“(States) don’t have this layer of federal regulations and staff and the consistency of how it����ap been regulated for decades,” she said. “Now they’ve got to create their own processes and permitting and data and guidance. It����ap a lot.”

Even if states were to pass laws and invest in programs to protect wildlife habitat, they would be unable to enforce those measures on federal land. Across the West, federal public lands cover vast swaths of many states and provide critical habitat for many species. If the U.S. Forest Service were to permit a logging operation on old-growth forest under the new “harm” definition, state wildlife officials could do nothing to stop it.

Meanwhile, some advocates are doubtful that state lawmakers have an appetite to take on the regulatory role once handled by the feds.

“Most state legislatures are pretty strongly captured by development and real estate interests,” said Kate Groetzinger, communications director with the Center for Western Priorities, a conservation group. “The political bar to putting something like this in place at the state level is a lot higher than it was when the Endangered Species Act was passed.”

Going to court

Last week, a coalition of environmental groups filed a challenging the “harm” rule. A pair of tribes in Washington state filed their own , asserting that the decision will infringe on tribal fisheries that the federal government is obligated to protect under treaty agreements.

Some legal experts expect a flood of lawsuits over specific proposed projects.

“Courts are going to have to figure out on a case-by-case basis what����ap covered and what����ap not covered,” said Börk, the UC Davis professor. “It����ap going to lead to widespread confusion over the next decades over what����ap illegal or legal, and it����ap going to make it harder for developers and landowners to know whether they have liability or not.”

Some advocates expressed concern that the lawsuits challenging the Trump administration could make it to the conservative Supreme Court, which could then permanently enshrine an interpretation of the Endangered Species Act that fails to protect habitat. That would leave a future administration powerless to undo the change, unless Congress were to rewrite the law.

But some see no real alternatives.

“I’d be worried if it got to the Supreme Court, but the alternative is just acquiescence, which I don’t think is a good idea,” said Anderson, the former Interior solicitor.

Stateline reporter Alex Brown can be reached at abrown@stateline.org.

©2026 States Newsroom. Visit at stateline.org. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

CAIRO (AP) — The U.S. military launched the 13th night of strikes Thursday against Iran, targeting key military and commercial sites as clashes continued to escalate over shipping routes. The attacks came after Yemen’s Iran-backed  said they targeted two Saudi oil tankers in the Red Sea, potentially widening the Iran war as international oil .

Shortly after the new attacks were announced, Iranian state media reported explosions in the port city of Bandar Abbas, a critical hub for moving military supplies as well as trade cargo, where two people were reportedly injured.

Blasts were also reported on Qeshm Island, home to stores of naval assets including drone boats that Iran can use to attack vessels on , as well as to the northwest near Andimeshk, Omidiyeh and Firuzabad. Four people were killed and five wounded in a U.S. missile attack on the outskirts of Ahvaz on the Karun River, Iranian state media said.

U.S. Central Command said the latest barrage was designed to “further degrade Iran’s ability to threaten civilian mariners and commercial vessels transiting regional waters” as the Americans push to regain control over the strategic waterway through which a fifth of the world’s oil and gas transited in peacetime. It said the strikes ended shortly before 5 a.m. local time Friday.

Meanwhile, the Houthis threatened to shut down , with the world economy  from Iran’s closure of the . Iran and the U.S. have stepped up attacks as they vie for control of the strait, .

�ʰ���������Գ��� threatened “major military punishment” against the Houthis if their attacks on ships continue.

“If they do this again, the U.S. will hold Iran responsible, in that the Houthis are a Surrogate and/or Proxy of Iran, and major military punishment will be inflicted upon Iran and, of course, the Houthis, themselves,” Trump wrote on social media.

As the rhetoric escalated, so did the economic fallout. The price of Brent crude oil, the international standard, spiked more than 6% to about $100 a barrel. That’s the highest level since May, before the two sides reached a preliminary peace agreement last month .

Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi of Iraq, which has close ties to both the U.S. and Iran, was in Tehran on Thursday to call for peace and dialogue, and he promised not to allow Iraqi territory to be used for attacks on Iran, his office said. Al-Zaidi  in Washington.

Houthi attacks are a ‘double whammy’ on oil shipments

The Houthis’ SABA news agency said the rebels had struck two tankers, the Encelia and the Layla, in the Red Sea, causing fires on both. There were no reports of casualties.

It was the first reported Houthi attack on a vessel since they announced a blockade of Saudi-linked shipping through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait earlier this week in retaliation for the kingdom’s blockade on Yemen and a  on the international airport in Yemen’s rebel-held capital, Sanaa.

, at the southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula, is a vital shipping chokepoint connecting the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden. Around 12% of the world’s trade, including a fourth of global container traffic, passes through there, moving between Europe and Asia via Egypt����ap Suez Canal.

The state-run Saudi Press Agency reported an attack set the Encelia ablaze overnight in the Red Sea. It did not mention the Layla.

The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations Center said it received a report of a tanker being struck by “an unknown projectile” 130 kilometers (80 miles) southwest of Al Shuqaiq, Saudi Arabia, in the Red Sea.

The Houthi attacks put at risk oil shipments from Saudi Arabia’s Yanbu port on the Red Sea and present a “double whammy” on top of the disruption in the Strait of Hormuz, said maritime data and analysis firm Lloyd’s List Intelligence.

Saudi Arabia has diverted millions of barrels a day of oil exports to Yanbu via an overland pipeline as the war has bottled up the Persian Gulf.

The Houthi threat “raises questions on the viability of this route,” Lloyd’s said in slides accompanying an online webinar Thursday.

Both sides dig in over Strait of Hormuz

Iran says it has the right to manage traffic and potentially charge fees in the Strait of Hormuz, which was open to all toll-free before the war. It has attacked ships using a route through the strait that is overseen by U.S. forces and intended to be outside Tehran’s control.

Trump said on social media Thursday that sanctioned Iranian funds in the possession of the U.S. will cover the expense of fixing boats damaged in the war.

“Please let this statement serve to represent, until further notice, that from this point forth, any and all damages done to Ships, Cargo, or anything related thereto, will be paid for by Iranian Money that the United States has in its possession, and controls,” Trump said.

It was unclear what legal mechanisms Trump would use to seize and spend the funds, but he said that doing so would be “the fair and equitable thing to do.”

Seyed Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s foreign minister, said such a seizure of assets would be an “incendiary” precedent.

“Those who celebrate or profit from such funds should remember: once governments normalize confiscation, no one’s assets are safe,” Abbas Araghchi said on social media early Friday. “Ensuing chaos will not be pretty or peaceful.”

In response to Iran’s attacks, the U.S. began the widening campaign of strikes across Iran and restored a naval blockade of Iran’s ports. U.S. Central Command said it has redirected about a dozen commercial vessels and disabled one since the blockade resumed.

The war of words has also escalated. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran would adopt an “eye for an eye” policy on U.S. strikes against its infrastructure. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio retorted that Trump’s policy is “a head for an eye.”

“The price will continue to get higher every single night until they come to their senses,” Rubio told reporters while traveling in the Philippines for .

Iran’s health ministry said Thursday that 55 people have been killed and 629 have been wounded since renewed U.S. airstrikes began on June 27.

Iran has responded to U.S. attacks by targeting energy infrastructure and  providing drinking water in parched neighboring Gulf countries.

Polls have shown the war is unpopular among Americans, a fact reflected in the narrow passage Thursday of a . Though a handful of Republicans crossed party lines to support the measure, the vote remained largely symbolic.

Becatoros reported from Athens, Greece, and Binkley from Washington. Associated Press writers Munir Ahmed in Islamabad, Pakistan; Bassem Mroue in Beirut; Michelle L. Price and Jim Gomez in Manila, Philippines; Qassim Abdul-Zahra in Baghdad; Konstantin Toropin and Matthew Lee in Washington; and Christopher Weber in Los Angeles contributed to this report.

Re: “Tuberculosis inquiry remains stuck as officials press for access,” July 21 news story.

I was appalled but not surprised to read that the Geo Group at the ICE processing facility in Aurora is stalling or refusing to provide necessary information about a tuberculosis case or cases to state and county health officials so that a proper communicable disease investigation can be completed and additional cases averted. A case of a potentially fatal illness in a 1,530-bed facility is a major cause for concern. The Geo Group’s assertion that the case in question was treated and cleared is no substitute for a public health investigation, and Geo’s refusal to cooperate with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment����ap directive to allow the inspectors into the facility is unacceptable and dangerous. Geo seems to be operating a rogue operation in Aurora, following its own rules and resisting state laws. Why it is being allowed to skirt the law, risking the health of inmates and workers, is a profound mystery.

Nancy Vaughan, Denver

Trump’s priorities are askew

Re: “Trump renews election attacks,” July 17 news story.

This past week, President Donald Trump spoke to the nation. He did not discuss the war in Iran, the inflation that comes with it or the billions of dollars required to replenish our military stocks. He did not address the most recent killings by ICE agents. He did not talk about the kitchen table economics or the disaster relief funds that he has held up. He did not talk about the fact that the U.S. debt is greater than the gross domestic product. No, all he talked about was his obsession with the lost 2020 election and the problems with our election process. A process that got him elected twice. And in his speech, he threatened to pull the licenses for NBC and CBS for not broadcasting his speech even though it was available on their streaming apps.

Does our president or his sycophants care about human life? Does he or his sycophants care about free speech? Does he or his sycophants care about the nation’s debt? Does he or his sycophants care about how you’re going to survive until your next paycheck?

I think not.

John Okada, Loveland

Not carrying Trump’s speech was a cover-up

Tonight, NBC and ABC refused to carry President Trump’s speech. Why? If even 50% of what he said is correct, I am sure the whole thing will be investigated by all the political pundits since he (Trump) claims it will be put out for all to see. It seems to me there has been a huge cover-up pulled on the American people. NBC gave a 20-second statement trying to cover their butt on the 9 O’clock news, but it said nothing.

I don’t want to revisit the 2020 election; we have heard that story way too often. The real question is, why are major networks trying to censor news? Are they controlled by parties that don’t want certain things to get out? Or, instead of being neutral, are they only willing to publish negative news on some and positive news on others? I know this much; I won’t be watching NBC or ABC. They can forget about me seeing ads for any companies spending money, trying to get me to buy anything.

Duane Ross, Aurora

Huckins’ art inspires climate action

Re: “Watching heaven burn,” July 19 features story.

Thanks to Ray Mark Rinaldi for describing the work of painter Shawn Huckins in the Sunday Post. Viewing wildfire through a partly drawn curtain serves up a powerful metaphor of our collective reaction to a warming planet. Our instinct is to turn away from the ongoing consequences of climate change, to close the curtains. The artist shows us that the “burn” cannot now be avoided — even a sliver of a view exposes us to the reality of an overheating planet. The next step is increasingly compelling: to step out of the room and take action to deal with the burning world.

 Phil Nelson, Golden

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

College students pursuing majors, advanced degrees or certifications in fields that consistently earn low incomes will no longer be able to take out federal loans to pay for their schooling under new Trump administration rules.

Many of the degree programs that educate social workers, artists, teacher aides and especially certification programs for barbers and nail technicians are likely to fail a new federal litmus test: Will they make more money upon graduation than if they never enrolled in the first place?

The new federal rule, finalized this month by the Education Department, comes amid a national — and is part of a larger effort to ensure a college degree or professional certification serves as an avenue for economic advancement rather than a debt trap.

It has also provoked debate over whether the mission of higher education — and help paying for it — should be tied to a paycheck after graduation.

But unlike other aspects of the administration’s education actions, the new policy has relatively broad support, with some student advocates saying it should be tougher.

The Education Department hasn’t yet calculated the final data against which institutions will be judged, leaving uncertainty on exactly what programs will face consequences.

The vast majority of bachelor‘s and advanced degree programs at public and nonprofit colleges and universities are expected to be safe, with about 3% expected to fail, according to the department����ap estimates.

However, about 33% of programs at for-profit schools are expected to fail.

Overall, 4.2% of students who receive federal loans or grants are enrolled in programs expected to fail the new benchmark, according to the Education Department. An estimated 5.2% of programs overall may fail, but not all students take out federal loans.

“For the first time in a very long time … institutions and college leaders are going to be held accountable,” said Michael Itzkowitz, president of the education research organization HEA Group. “They are going to start looking and paying more attention to economic outcomes than they ever have before.”

Education experts said some institutions — public, private and for-profit colleges — with programs that fail to adhere to the rule will probably close them, while others will tweak offerings to better match students with good-paying jobs.

Salary vs. debt: what the student loan rule requires

To keep federal loans flowing, the median income of graduates for a school’s bachelor‘s degree, associate degree and undergraduate certificate programs must be higher than the median earnings of people who received only a high school diploma.

Using Internal Revenue Service data, the Education Department will measure the earnings of graduates four years after completion. Their income will be compared with the median earnings of working adults ages 25 to 34 with only a high school diploma either in the state where the college is located or nationally if the institution has high rates of out-of-state enrollment.

In California, HEA says that benchmark is about $36,000 — roughly what a full-time worker earns on the state’s minimum wage.

For master’s and doctoral programs, their graduates must make more than the median 25- to 34-year-old bachelor‘s graduate in either that specific field or across all bachelor‘s degrees, whichever is lower.

“It����ap kind of a baseline expectation for students that no matter what type of program they pursue that they should be better off because of the investment that they’ve made,” said Diane Cheng, vice president of policy at the Institute for Higher Education Policy.

Degrees most likely to fail the federal earnings test

But programs in music, drama and fine arts are expected to fail at high rates because their graduates earn too little, as are master’s programs in the mental and social health fields, according to the Education Department.

According to the Postsecondary Education and Economics Research Center at American University, California mental and social health master’s programs fare much better than elsewhere, because graduates in the state tend to earn more, a median of $70,485 compared with $60,175 nationwide.

At the undergraduate level, mental and social health programs are expected to fail at very low rates nationwide, according to HEA.

The highest percentage of failed programs is expected to be undergraduate certificates, especially for cosmetology, massage therapy and film.

Similar rules existed under the Biden administration, but applied only to certificate programs at public and private nonprofit schools and all degrees and certificates at for-profit colleges, though the rules weren’t in place long enough for schools to face penalties, experts said.

Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, said “accountability is well overdue in higher education,” but said federal and state education policies may be needed to find other ways to support students in some failing programs.

“We need social workers,” Mitchell said. “Whether it����ap the fentanyl epidemic or homelessness in L.A., we need people who can work on the street with people who need it the most.”

There’s also been concern at religious studies programs amid different estimates of failure rates calculated by the Education Department. Gregory Baylor, senior counsel with the Alliance Defending Freedom, said society benefits from people choosing to “serve the world through religious vocation.”

“The government shouldn’t punish people who pursue socially valuable callings just because in its judgment they don’t earn enough money,” he said.

For-profit programs hit hardest

For-profit colleges, which have long faced criticism for saddling students with debt for little benefit, have the highest expected fail rate.

Among the sectors most at risk is cosmetology and related personal grooming services, where the Education Department expects more than 90% of undergraduate certificate programs to fail and, according to the PEER Center, annual income for graduates is typically under $28,000.

The beauty industry has argued that graduates of their programs aren’t as low paid as it seems, because many work part time, and both part- and full-time workers earn a significant amount in tips and may underreport those dollars to avoid taxes.

In response, the Education Department decided to delay the rule’s implementation by at least one year for programs that prepare students for careers in which a majority of workers receive tips, so the programs can be evaluated under the new Trump-supported “No Tax on Tips” policy.

If reported graduate earnings don’t rise significantly despite taxes being waived on tips, and the rule isn’t adjusted to better reflect the part-time nature of much of the beauty workforce, “we are going to be short somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 new entrants into the field every single year,” said John Russell, who leads the American Assn. of Career Schools, a trade group for cosmetology, barbering and similar schools.

Education experts said one possible response to such a scenario is for state legislatures that set licensing requirements to decide some occupations — such as barbers and stylists — need less training.

Concern about arts

At the California Institute of the Arts, administrators expressed concern about judging earnings four years after graduation given the nature of the field they are teaching.

“A lot of them are essentially independent contractors, so it����ap a slightly different trajectory than someone who goes to an engineering program,” said Michael Bryant, interim provost at CalArts. “It takes them a little bit longer to get themselves established.”

To minimize the possibility programs fail, Bryant said, the college is taking a number of steps, including expanding its career fair and increasing industry partnerships. If programs do end up failing, the college may use some of its own funds to help students afford those programs.

“Southern California is such an important cultural destination and a big place of cultural production,” said CalArts dean Steven Lam. “We’re in a moment when the federal government is creating policy that may further damage that ecosystem.”

Jonathan Gienapp, Stanford associate professor of history and law, stressed there are reasons for education beyond making money.

“In certain fields of study, especially in the humanities, whether or not that program has been successful and has done a really good job in its educational mission, might not be all that directly tied to immediate earnings potential,” he said.

©2026 Los Angeles Times. Visit at latimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House on Wednesday passed a defense policy bill that incorporates President Donald Trump’s request for a historic $1.15 trillion in spending for national security and that would designate the Department of Defense as the Department of War.

It also would provide for a pay raise next year ranging from 5% to 7% for service members, depending upon their rank.

The National Defense Authorization Act is generally one of the more bipartisan bills that Congress takes up on an annual basis. That����ap not the case this year. The vote was 216-212.

Democrats took issue with steep spending increases for the Pentagon as Republicans attempted to cut numerous non-defense programs through other bills. They also opposed some of the conservative social policy riders that were included.

For example, the bill includes a prohibition on gender-related medical care under the military health program known as TRICARE. It also eases hurdles for service members to carry a privately owned firearm on base, following Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s .

Republican leaders’ decision to attach Trump’s to the defense bill upon its passing also amplified the partisan divide. Speaker Mike Johnson is working to accommodate Republican lawmakers who are angry that the Senate won’t pass the SAVE America Act and are insisting that it be included in must-pass bills until the Senate relents.

The House bill is testing a normally bipartisan process

Rep. Mike Rogers, the Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, emphasized that he knows there were areas of disagreement, but he emphasized that Wednesday’s vote was a step in a long process. He promised to work in a bipartisan manner on a final product that can pass both chambers and be signed into law.

Rogers said the United States needs to reverse decades of underinvestment and neglect in the nation’s armed forces and defense industrial base.

“This bill will do that and much more,” he said. “It will build the ready, capable and lethal fighting force we need to deter China and other adversaries.”

Rep. Adam Smith, the ranking Democratic lawmaker on the Armed Services Committee, said the defense spending the administration has asked for this year is approaching $1.6 trillion when including separate efforts to and

“The American people are struggling to pay their bills and we’re going to put $1.6 trillion into the defense budget. It����ap not a reasonable thing to ask,” Smith said.

Smith also expressed concern about the war with Iran and that in supporting the defense bill, lawmakers are “de facto supporting this war with no end in sight.”

“We are in an incredibly, incredibly dangerous time,” Smith said. “I want to maintain the bipartisan nature of this bill. I do. And I know that the chairman does. But if we’re going to do this, we’re going to need some Republicans to stand up to the president of the United States and say, ‘No. No, we’re not going to get you $1.6 trillion. No, we’re not just going to give you a blank check for a war that is totally out of control.”

The White House backs parts of the legislation

The spending increases authorized in the bill would not take effect until Congress follows up with a separate defense appropriations bill. The Senate has not yet approved its version of the defense measure. It����ap possible a final product won’t be ready until after the midterm elections.

The White House applauded the spending levels authorized in the House bill and the Department of War designation that it says recognizes the “willingness to fight and win wars on behalf of our nation.”

The president issued an executive order last year renaming the Defense Department, but it����ap up to Congress to make the change official. The Congressional Budget Office that the renaming could cost taxpayers as much as $125 million.

The White House’s statement also said that the administration has a number of concerns with certain provisions in the bill and would work with Congress before a final bill is presented to the president. Among those concerns was a section of the bill it said would limit or undermine the president����ap ability to .

In 2023, during a national reckoning on issues of race in America, seven Army bases’ names were changed because they honored Confederate leaders. Last year, those bases reverted to their original names, but with different namesakes who share Confederate surnames. The Army found other service members with the same last names to honor.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House approved legislation Wednesday that would bar members of Congress from purchasing individual stocks, advancing an ethics proposal that lawmakers in both parties have but repeatedly .

Some Democrats sided with the Republican majority in the 232-198 vote that came as lawmakers prepared to return home and campaign ahead of the midterm elections, with Republicans working to show action on an issue that has become a symbol of voter distrust.

But the breakthrough was tempered by Republican provisions in the bill that would from the trading ban and from the inclusion of an unrelated voter identification requirement, drawing opposition from many Democrats. The bill’s passage in the Senate remains uncertain.

“This bill, quite simply, is a sham,” Rep. Joe Morelle, a New York Democrat, said on the House floor ahead of the vote. He called the voter identification provision a “poison pill” designed to sink the legislation.

Supporters nevertheless hailed the bill, known as the Stop Insider Trading Act, as the most significant congressional action yet to restrict stock trades by members of Congress.

“I had legislation that would have required divestiture. I preferred that approach,” Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said. “But you got to build a coalition in a body. And I think this is a giant step forward.”

Rep. Bryan Steil, the Wisconsin Republican who sponsored the legislation, called it “transformational.”

Critics argued the legislation falls well short of a true stock trading ban because it would let lawmakers keep stocks they already own and continue selling them.

Bipartisan support eroded further after Republicans added a requirement that voters present photo identification at the polls, a key element of the SAVE Act, an election measure backed by President Donald Trump that has repeatedly stalled in the Senate.

What is in the Stop Insider Trading Act?

The legislation would prohibit lawmakers, their spouses and dependent children from buying individual stocks while in office. It would let them keep stocks they already own but require public notice at least seven days before selling them. Some investments would be exempt, including interest in a widely held investment fund and certain investments held in a trust.

The bill does not extend to the president or vice president. President Donald Trump disclosed in May that in the first quarter of this year he had made more than 3,600 buy and sell orders, many of them involving companies whose profits as head of the government.

Outside ethics groups said the bill leaves intact the very conflicts it is meant to address by allowing lawmakers to keep existing stock holdings.

The Campaign Legal Center urged Congress to reject the measure, saying it “fails to address the two inherent problems with congressional stock ownership: the appearance of insider trading and members’ ability to profit from their official position.”

Not all Republicans were on board for the stock ban. Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie, who was defeated in a primary earlier this year by a Trump-backed candidate, derided Republicans for inserting the voter identification requirement.

“Republicans added voter-ID in the legislation. Not to get Dems to vote for voter-ID,” Massie wrote in a social media post. “but to get them to vote against the stock trading ban, so they can use it in the Nov. election.”

Stock trading has become a potent campaign issue

Congressional stock trading has become a potent campaign issue as candidates from both parties call for banning the practice. The issue has been a fixture of campaign ads for several years as candidates seek to tap into voters’ distrust of Washington.

Ahead of Wednesday’s vote, many Republicans facing tough reelection races lined up to speak in favor of it.

“Banning congressional stock trading is a simple proposition: If you serve the public, you serve only the public,” said New York Rep. Mike Lawler. “You don’t get to benefit from the power the people have loaned you. This reform is about fairness.”

Lawmakers have faced ethics scrutiny and, in some cases, criminal investigations over stock trades that critics say benefited from nonpublic information obtained through lawmakers’ official duties. Although no broad ban has become law, similar proposals have been .

Momentum accelerated last year when Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., launched a discharge petition to force a vote on a congressional stock trading ban that bypassed House Republican leaders.