作者： root

Newsom blamed Trump for high-speed rail’s $4 billion funding cut. Records show California never bought the trains it promised.

2026-08-02T07:00:12-0400 / CBS News

California’s High-Speed Rail Authority repeatedly missed key deadlines to buy its trains, a failure federal officials cited when they pulled $4 billion in funding a year ago. More than a year and a half after the original deadline, the authority still cannot say when it expects to award the contract. The state says that the date remains “TBD.”

Approved by voters in 2008, the project was originally designed to link San Francisco and Los Angeles in under three hours with electric trains capable of reaching 220 mph. There’s no direct line between the two major cities, and the ride now takes 10.5 to 12 hours.

But the current plan is limited to the middle section of the route — a flat 171-mile stretch between Merced and Bakersfield in the Central Valley, selected because construction was expected to be easier, with no need to drill any tunnels. It’s estimated that high-speed rail would cut that three-hour train ride in half.

Service was projected to begin by 2033.

July 2025 | “Not a reliable partner”

In July 2025, the Trump administration pulled $4 billion in federal funding for California’s high-speed rail project, citing the state’s failure to lay any tracks after spending $15 billion over 16 years. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said “federal dollars are not a blank check — they come with a promise to deliver results.”

Purchasing the trains was a key milestone. Federal officials concluded there was “no viable path” to completing the segment on time. And California had promised to connect “major metropolitan cities” but could now deliver only a substantially reduced system that “may connect two random endpoints.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom called the federal withdrawal of funding a “political stunt to punish California,” and state Attorney General Rob Bonta promptly sued “to stop Trump’s politically motivated attack on high-speed rail.”

Yet, less than six months later, California dropped the lawsuit. The rail authority offered no explanation, but said it hoped to work with the federal government some time in the future after deciding this administration “was not a reliable partner.”

However, a CBS California investigation found it was the California High-Speed Rail Authority that repeatedly failed to meet its own deadlines to buy the trains — a key requirement in the federal grant agreement — then quietly dropped its lawsuit weeks after missing the new deadline it promised a federal judge it would meet.

Grant documents signed during the Biden administration required the rail authority to execute a trainset contract by Dec. 31, 2024. California missed that deadline.

Months later, when the Trump administration moved to terminate funding, federal officials pointed directly to the missed deadline as evidence that High-Speed Rail was failing to meet critical milestones and could not be relied upon to deliver the project on schedule.

High-Speed Rail did not dispute that it missed the deadline. It did not provide an explanation for the delays to CBS California Investigates. Instead, the authority pointed to public records, none of which acknowledge the delay.

File: A general view of the construction site for the California High-Speed Rail Project in Fresno, California, on July 6, 2026. Michael Yanow/NurPhoto via Getty Images

December 2025 | Still no trains

In sworn court filings, High-Speed Rail assured a federal judge that it would execute a train contract by Dec. 1, 2025 — and that doing so would keep the project on schedule.

But High-Speed Rail missed that deadline too — canceling the board meeting where the train contract was expected to be approved.

Multiple sources familiar with the procurement process and litigation said missing the revised deadline undercut California’s legal argument that it could be trusted to meet future deadlines and complete the project on time.

The authority had already missed the original deadline in its federal funding agreement, and now it had missed the revised deadline it had promised the court it would meet.

By missing the deadline it set for itself in court, the state had effectively proven the federal government’s point: the project was not on track.

Weeks later, the lawsuit disappeared.

The state quietly dismissed the case two days before Christmas. This time there was no press release and no explanation for taxpayers — just a single reference buried among the federal grant documents and court filings posted on the High-Speed Rail Authority’s website.

Newsom, Bonta and the authority have never publicly explained why the train procurement deadlines were missed.

January 2026 | “Finally laying the tracks”?

“It was appropriate for us to pull the lawsuit,” Bonta told CBS California Investigates two weeks later at Gov. Newsom’s final State of the State address. But he declined to elaborate, directing questions to the High-Speed Rail Authority.

Minutes earlier, during the governor’s address, Newsom had boasted about the project’s progress: California is “finally laying the tracks of the nation’s first high-speed rail system.”

But the state had not actually laid any high-speed rail track.

What the state had built was a railhead — a logistics depot designed to receive, store and stage the rail that crews would eventually install. The state’s own milestone announcement weeks later said the completed facility “allows California to begin receiving and staging materials needed” to install high-speed rail track.

“There’s been a railyard created that has track on it, but it is not high-speed rail track,” High-Speed Rail Inspector General Ben Belnap confirmed to CBS California Investigates. “High-speed rail track, as it’s defined, has not been laid yet.”

June 2026 | Accountability concerns

Six months after the governor’s claim, California still had not started laying high-speed rail. In a June statement, the authority’s spokesperson told CBS California Investigates the commitment is “to begin laying high-speed rail track by the end of the year.”

In June, the authority approved a team to build the track. The same day, it released its 2026 business plan, which continues to project passenger service by 2033 but does not disclose the status of its trainset procurement. That line is blank. Belnap told CBS California Investigates that repeatedly missing this key milestone raises accountability concerns.

“Those train sets are critical to testing that needs to occur on track and systems,” Belnap explained. “It’s going to take a while to get those trains manufactured, so you want to start that clock, so you’re not hindered on the back end.”

August 2023 | The four-year clock began

When High-Speed Rail’s board approved the trainset procurement in August 2023, the authority’s board memo said contracting a manufacturer in 2024 was “critical” — both for the federal grants and the overall project timeline.

“Our action today allows us to deliver on our commitment to meet our federal grant timelines to start testing,” then-Board Chair Tom Richards said.

Records indicate there’s about a four-year lead time between signing a train contract and having trains ready for a multi-year testing phase. The original procurement plan called for two prototype trains to be delivered in 2028 for testing and trial running, with four more by the end of 2030 for passenger service.

November 2024 | New CEO, new train design?

The state has not publicly acknowledged the missed milestones, but multiple sources inside High Speed Rail blame the delay on decisions made by the CEO.

Sources tell CBS California Investigates that High Speed Rail CEO Ian Choudri decided to change the trainset specifications shortly after taking over in 2024.

The rail authority declined to comment. However, less than two months before the federal deadline to buy the trains, board members raised concerns about Choudri’s plan to change the trainset design during a board meeting.

The authority had already narrowed the field to two finalists and was in an active procurement phase to purchase the trains.

Board member Ernest Camacho questioned Choudri about changing the train design from a wide-body train to “something that would be different,” warning the change could require the authority to cancel the procurement and start over.

“We have to be able to allow the bidders an opportunity to perhaps rethink that,” Camacho cautioned. “We may have to cancel that procurement or rewrite a new specification.”

The authority’s legal counsel interrupted and said the procurement could not be discussed in an open meeting. Board members were told they could instead meet individually with the CEO.

Weeks later, the deadline passed with no train contract.

Choudri has declined repeated interview requests from CBS California Investigates, pointing instead to public information on the authority’s website, which still includes procurement details from 2023.

Now, the four-year clock is stalled

Using the roughly four-year timeline in the authority’s original procurement schedule, a contract executed in 2026 would put initial train delivery around 2030. That would leave roughly two years for testing and certification before the authority’s projected 2032–2033 opening window, rather than the four years built into its original schedule.

Every month without a train contract further compresses that window.

That margin has all but disappeared. The authority’s 2025 Supplemental Project Update Report moved the start of passenger service to Jan. 1, 2032, with trainset deliveries beginning in early 2030. The same report, delivered to the Legislature in August 2025, listed the trainset procurement with “an estimated execution date of December 1, 2025.”

That date came and went with no contract.

The authority’s June statement to CBS California Investigates confirms the math: initial train deliveries were slated for early 2030, with “roughly two years of testing and certification” required ahead of 2032–2033 operations. That left little margin for further delay.

Federal officials flagged the same risk before pulling the funding. The Federal Railroad Administration’s June 2025 compliance review cited a pattern of “unrealistic assumptions” — including “the schedule for trainset procurement and safety and performance testing.”

It counted the missed trainset procurement among its nine key findings, concluding there was “no viable path” to completing the Central Valley segment by 2033.

Earlier this year, a U.S. Senate Commerce Committee investigation accused California leaders of wasting federal funds and gross mismanagement — citing the missed deadlines under the authority’s current management.

We asked. They didn’t answer.

CBS California Investigates sent the High-Speed Rail Authority 20 questions on the train procurement delays.

We asked why the authority failed to execute a trainset contract by the original Dec. 31, 2024, deadline why it didn’t meet the new Dec. 1, 2025 deadline, and whether the authority still believes the project remains on schedule?

The authority did not answer those questions. Instead, it provided a statement defending the project and emphasizing that a 2024 Federal Railroad Administration review, conducted under the Biden administration, found no fraud, waste, abuse or compliance issues that would affect the project’s completion.

The authority cited the review as evidence the project had been in compliance with its federal agreements. But the review predated both missed deadlines.

It came before the authority failed to do the one thing it told the Federal Railroad Administration, the court and California taxpayers it would do: buy the trains.

The authority also argued that losing the federal funding created “a new opportunity” because federal requirements had increased costs and slowed project delivery.

But it never explained why it missed the train procurement deadlines and provided no update on when a trainset contract would be awarded.

Instead, it directed CBS California Investigates to a procurement webpage showing the award date is now listed as “TBD.”

Newsom did not respond to CBS California Investigates’ requests for an interview or respond to questions about the train procurement.

California’s U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff criticized the Trump administration for cutting federal funding for the project, while acknowledging the need for oversight.

“It’s critical that taxpayer dollars are spent responsibly and with full transparency and oversight, but removing billions in federal funding from another California project is not the right approach,” Schiff said in a statement. He called on the Trump administration to work with California to meet its transportation needs. But he continued, “I have engaged with the relevant transportation agencies to understand the challenges that remain for the project,” and he said that state transportation infrastructure investment “must be done properly, with careful safeguards for taxpayer dollars and without partisan or vindictive influence.”

Sen. Alex Padilla said in a statement, “The Trump Administration has always had it out for California, and the California High-Speed Rail project is no exception. Instead of partnering with California to deliver the forward-looking infrastructure Californians voted for, President Trump chose to cancel funding that supports good-paying jobs and strengthens economic growth.” He went on to say he’d continue to fight for the funding.

“人为破坏指控”不成立？特朗普与钦点检察官因倒影池问题生分歧

2026年8月2日 19:16 / 联合早报

特朗普对华盛顿林肯纪念堂倒影池的巨资翻新工程备受争议，他将水池衬垫剥落问题归咎于人为破坏。这张摄于7月30日的照片显示，倒影池再度排干池水进行新一轮翻修。 （路透社）

（华盛顿综合电）由美国总统特朗普任命的联邦检察官皮罗，撤销特朗普此前对林肯纪念堂倒影池翻新工程遭人为破坏的指控，结果遭到总统反对和猛烈抨击。

倒影池翻新工程耗资1470万美元（约1885万新元），是特朗普任期内高调实施且备受争议的焦点项目。翻新后的水池很快滋生大量藻类，蓝色衬垫也出现部分脱落。

特朗普一再将问题归咎于人为破坏，他的政府指控前奥运选手赫恩（David Hearn）破坏联邦财物重罪。赫恩因此被捕，可能面临长达10年的监禁。他拒不认罪。

哥伦比亚特区联邦检察官皮罗（Jeanine Pirro）于当地时间星期五（7月31日）向法院提交文件，请求法官撤销特朗普政府对赫恩的指控。

皮罗在文件中说，从内政部收到的最新文件显示，倒影池衬垫剥落是安装不当和仓促赶工所致，而非人为破坏造成。

特朗普强烈反对皮罗的判断。他星期六（8月1日）在社媒平台Truth social上写道：“我百分百不同意皮罗对倒影池问题的看法，不知道她怎么想的。在我看来，这纯粹是人为破坏。”

他还分享一段将近四分钟的监控录像，镜头聚焦水池部分区域的画面，配文声称录像显示有人破坏水池。

视频中可以看到，工人进行清洁工作时，至少有两人将手伸入水中，且不止一次，但并未明确显示这些人实施剥下衬垫等破坏行为。

特朗普誓言推动《反武器化法案》通过

这并非特朗普首次与自己钦点的官员产生摩擦，他4月初解除原司法部长邦迪的职务，后来提名布兰奇出任司法部长。布兰奇目前任代理部长，须获国会批准才能转正，但遭到共和党参议员科宁和蒂利斯反对。

特朗普星期六宣布将联手国会推动《反武器化法案》，试图将18亿美元的特设基金转化为联邦法律，用于补偿他认为受政治迫害的支持者，甚至不惜牺牲布兰奇的转正议程。

特朗普在社媒发文说，如果科宁和蒂利斯不支持布兰奇的提名，他将“大力推动《反武器化法案》……获得通过”，还称《反武器化法案》“将立即重回议程，我一定会把它办成”。

反武器化基金由司法部于今年春天设立，但引发民主党和部分共和党人反对。批评者担心，基金的赔偿范围可能涵盖因2021年1月6日国会骚乱被定罪者。

The fight for Michigan: How a marquee Senate primary became the Democrats’ latest proxy war

2026-08-02T10:30:25.718Z / CNN

Chuck Schumer isn’t much for subtlety. When the Senate Democratic leader called retiring Sen. Gary Peters into his office in late June, Schumer went right to discussing the primary to succeed Peters in his home state of Michigan.

Schumer believed Abdul El-Sayed’s poll numbers had fallen from recent heights, suggesting there was a chance to beat the former Wayne County health director. He didn’t want El-Sayed, who is running hard from the Bernie Sanders and anti-Israel wings of the party, as the Democratic nominee both for ideological reasons and fears he would lose the November election to former Rep. Mike Rogers.

The three-way Democratic race was a mess, Schumer told Peters, and state Sen. Mallory McMorrow was clearly not going to win.

He never said it outright, but Peters walked away thinking his mission was to get McMorrow to drop out and give Rep. Haley Stevens a one-on-one matchup against El-Sayed.

Tuesday’s Michigan Senate primary has become a bitter, microcosmic referendum on many of the fights Democrats are having nationally. With McMorrow now out of the race, Stevens has talked up her experience working for former President Barack Obama and a need to drill down on manufacturing and other Michigan issues, all while being kept afloat by more than $50 million in outside spending. El-Sayed has built his campaign around promoting Medicare for All but also targeting the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and other outside interests that have tried to stop him.

However it ends, the fight in a purple state that is almost always central to which party wins the White House — and which both Republicans and Democrats believe could help decide the Senate majority this year — has become the greatest showcase yet of a party split into bitter factions and an establishment struggling to lead it.

Committed supporters of El-Sayed and Stevens can’t stand each other. Backers of each candidate across the country have treated the race as if it’s an existential crisis.

With just a few dozen hours left until the results come in, no one on either campaign is quite sure where the race stands, other than the very real possibility of Democrats wounding themselves for November no matter who wins.

“There are a lot of very strong, intense feelings right now, and we have to bring people together because we have to remember what the November election is about. It is about winning the House and the Senate, so we cannot lose the Senate seat,” said Rep. Debbie Dingell, one of the few Michigan Democrats who have not taken sides in the Senate primary.

“Nobody can like the kind of brutality, the ugliness that we have seen,” she said. “That makes it harder to come together. But we have no choice.”

Schumer’s first choice to succeed Peters was term-limited Gov. Gretchen Whitmer — he always prefers candidates who’ve won statewide previously — but she shut him down completely.

For months, Schumer and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York had made their unofficial backing of Stevens clear, inviting her to donor events and directing other support her way. Gillibrand even went so far as suggesting to several donors, ominously, that McMorrow had been a member of the Democratic Socialists of America – even though McMorrow isn’t.

“Senator Gillibrand is proud that Democrats are in a strong position to defeat Mike Rogers and continue our 30-year record of holding this seat,” her spokesman, James Singer, told CNN when asked about those moves.

Between managing Senate Democrats in Washington and an array of other complicated races, Schumer’s attention went elsewhere for much of the spring. His concerns never faded, though, and his gut check with Peters left him sure that the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which had been working to boost El-Sayed, was onto something about his weakness.

Also urged on by his wife, Peters undertook the mission in his typical soft-sell way. McMorrow called him, enraged, after a Wall Street Journal story published on June 26 included a mention that he thought she needed to consider dropping out. They didn’t speak again before she gave him a heads up on July 5 that she was about to suspend her campaign, according to a person familiar with the matter, deciding with advisers that she didn’t want to be painted as a spoiler if she wanted to run for another office in the future.

Stevens couldn’t believe her luck but couldn’t figure out what to do, according to two people familiar with the matter. Intermediaries kept telling her to give McMorrow space to make her decision, so much so that when McMorrow posted her video, Stevens decided not to call her.

For months, she’d been fixated on McMorrow as blowing the race for her. Only when a Politico reporter reached out to her campaign about what was being made out as a snub did Stevens text her. While El-Sayed in his own call to McMorrow asked for her support, Stevens never did.

Stevens also didn’t ask Peters for his support the first time they spoke after McMorrow’s exit, despite being urged to, according to two people. A second call had to be arranged for that, but even before Peters said yes, he had already stepped up his efforts, talking to donors and other Michigan officials about potentially jumping in for her.

After McMorrow’s exit from the race, Peters chatted with Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who had endorsed McMorrow. The two senators are friendly, and Peters said while he liked El-Sayed, he’d been convinced that Stevens was the one with the better chance of winning in the fall.

According to three people familiar with their conversation, both senators shared their concerns about Stevens’ struggles as a candidate. He asked if she was thinking of endorsing. She asked if he was thinking of endorsing. They both said maybe.

A week later, Peters made his Stevens endorsement official. A week after that, Warren went with El-Sayed, though she had previously declined to after meeting with him in Washington last year.

For months, Stevens’ campaign had been counting on their prime voters being the kinds of women and African Americans, especially people without college degrees, who wouldn’t tune into the campaign until closer to the election. Her advisers believed that showcasing her quirkiness, her particular accent and her connections to Obama would be exactly what would appeal to the voters they needed.

Instead, Stevens trudged through months of mostly small crowds and awkward moments clipped and quickly shared online. The staff was demoralized, and the candidate, despite deleting X from her phone, sometimes struggled to keep up her own determination when friends texted her the worst bits.

“Up until that point, the campaign was in a very defensive posture. It was very hard to ‘let Haley be Haley,’ because the internet was going to dunk on her, and there was no one to defend her,” said one person involved with the campaign. “She got all the downside of being the establishment candidate and none of the upside.”

How Stevens’ most famous comment emerged surprised them all. A C-SPAN camera happened to show up at an otherwise unremarkable campaign event – and a Republican-linked account posted 18 seconds of it, in particular her promise that she would campaign with “a little bit of ‘stick it to ‘em,’ because that’s the Michigan way.”

That clip has 3.4 million views on X. It drew a wave of sympathetic attention from fans who saw her delivery as folksy. Her campaign manager rushed an order of “Stick It To ‘Em” yard signs that became hugely popular. A follow-up interview in the halls of the US Capitol with TMZ – in which she keeps talking about the moment even as an aide tries to pull her away – was widely shared.

Those moments of getting better attention online became known internally as “Justice for Poochie,” a reference to a widely mocked 2025 video in which Stevens described a dog she had been scared of as a child.

Meanwhile, Whitmer was going through her own difficult weeks of being blasted by unions and Democrats in the legislature for a series of vetoes. Peters and others were urging her to jump on with Stevens. Even after beating El-Sayed in her own primary in 2018, she felt she barely knew him, though she heard the buzz among some of her staff about him. She knew Stevens.

“If Gretchen Whitmer bowed to pressure, she would be running for Senate herself,” said one person familiar with the governor.

Whitmer wasn’t sure how much of a difference her endorsement would make, despite Peters and others trying to push her along. She sat with polls that suggested she could sway still-undecided voters by attaching to Stevens her same results-minded sensibility.

Surprising even some on her staff, Whitmer jumped in, endorsing Stevens just over a week before the primary.

Elissa Slotkin was also elected as a first-time candidate to the House as part of the same Michigan wave as Stevens in 2018. She narrowly beat Rogers in 2024. She has gotten heavily involved in the primary for her former House seat to the point of paying for polls for her preferred candidate.

For now, Slotkin is on the sidelines in the Senate race. Even as she’s tried to whip up chatter about a potential 2028 presidential run by throwing down on the direction of the Democratic Party, Slotkin has insisted she has to stay neutral via a statement of principle that applies almost exclusively to this year’s race.

The result: Slotkin has become an object of derision and anger herself. Both El-Sayed and Stevens supporters tell CNN they’re not at all convinced Slotkin can be the unifying figure she keeps saying she wants to be once the dust settles. Instead, the exasperation is feeding a variety of conspiracy theories that she also is out to make the Democrats lose.

Through an aide, Slotkin declined to comment.

Bernie Sanders coaches El-Sayed

El-Sayed has made some on his staff uncomfortable at points with both the substance of his attacks on Stevens and the feared political fallout. But emboldened by his belief that victory is at hand, he has kept going, suggesting to supporters that his campaign was walking “the exact same path” as movements like the push for LGBT rights or ending Jim Crow.

As McMorrow and Stevens fought over voters they wanted to be their base, El-Sayed solidified and purposely kept speaking to his.

He campaigned with Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is far more sparing than her mentor in whom she endorses.

An admonition from Sanders last year while campaigning in Kalamazoo stuck: “You’ve got to tell them you’re a doctor. Talk about being a doctor,” the senator said, according to two people familiar with his comment. (El-Sayed graduated from medical school but pivoted to a career in public health instead of completing a residency or practicing medicine.)

Sanders meant not just stressing El-Sayed’s own medical experience but showcasing a fuller personality so that he wouldn’t be dismissed as an ultra-leftist or an outsider with his Arab heritage and name.

Even before he was back in Michigan two weeks ago for a series of rallies he successfully urged Ocasio-Cortez to join him for, Sanders was chipping in with more advice, including “Don’t shy away from talking about Gaza,” since AIPAC’s allies would spend millions against him anyway.

The afternoon after McMorrow dropped out, El-Sayed got more bad news when sexual assault allegations were published about Graham Platner, running a parallel insurgent campaign for Senate in Maine with the same consulting firm helping both.

It wasn’t just that Platner’s implosion prompted another round of questions about what wasn’t known about El-Sayed — accentuated by his refusal for weeks to disclose his personal finances — El-Sayed also put out a statement that condemned sexual assault but did not explicitly call for Platner to quit even as other Democrats were.

Others have suggested that El-Sayed was being either too deferential to his consultants or to Sanders, who himself waited on calling for Platner to leave the race. His campaign spokesperson did not respond when asked to explain the timing or content of the statement. But the campaign acknowledged internally it was a mistake, according to a person familiar with the matter.

El-Sayed has otherwise been deliberately unapologetic, standing by positions even when they go beyond where some think the median voter seems to be. He refused to back down on campaigning with streamer Hasan Piker, who has said America deserved September 11, a comment Piker has since said he regrets, and has called Mao Zedong “one of the great leaders of this world, a man who changed the entire universe.”

He took a swipe at Whitmer after her endorsement and repeatedly attacked Stevens even after calling on allies to lower the temperature as they mocked her “stick it to ‘em” moment.

“When AIPAC watches this: Come for me, see what happens,” he said in an interview posted Thursday. “You picked literally the least capable candidate in America, right? And then Chuck Schumer doubles down and then AIPAC doubles down and part of me is like, OK.”

“Everyone in America understands you want to blame all of your problems on Jewish Americans,” Stevens fired back Thursday night on X. “But buddy, let me be very clear, I will lower the costs of groceries, ban stock trading for elected officials, stop Trump’s abuses of power, and protect Michigan manufacturing. And you’ll just be a celebrity whining and writing books to get even richer. You’re part of the complainer class, looking for their next book or podcast deal.”

El-Sayed has kept making the same joke about having a funny name at nearly every campaign stop. His own videos wearing fitted T-shirts and dancing were themselves a deliberate move to make him seem more relatable, less scary. Going viral helped too.

“We all feel a tremendous amount of pressure. But the candidate who has the most fun usually wins,” said Rebecca Katz, one of El-Sayed’s strategists. “The stakes are as high as they can possibly be, but we’re having fun.”

As an array of Democrats are turned off by El-Sayed’s pugilistic approach and positions, particularly on Israel, that’s exactly why he’s generating so much interest from those more aligned with Sanders.

“This is a pivotal race, not just for the Michigan Senate seat, but for the entire map in 2028 — because if a progressive wins not only the primary but the general, the centrists’ whole argument that progressives can’t win a swing state is moot,” a Sanders ally told CNN. “And that sets the stage for a national candidate in 2028.”

韩国拟严打大型活动期间 酒店民宿业者漫天要价

2026年8月2日 19:54 / 联合早报

韩国男团“防弹少年团”日前宣布将在釜山举行巡演，就有歌迷反映房价被大幅调涨，或原本已预订的客房遭无故取消，引发舆论关注。 （法新社）

韩国男团“防弹少年团”日前宣布将在釜山举行巡演，就有歌迷反映房价被大幅调涨，或原本已预订的客房遭无故取消，引发舆论关注。 （法新社）

（首尔讯）韩国政府拟进一步规范住宿业经营行为， 当地酒店和爱彼迎（Airbnb）民宿业者若在大型活动前漫天要价及无故取消订房，将面临处罚。

《韩国先驱报》报道，7月31日，一项包含上述措施的《旅游促进法》修正案被正式提出。这项法案将强制要求住宿提供方公开价格，并禁止不合理涨价和取消预订等不公平经营行为。

根据法案，违规者可能面临多种制裁，包括限制获取“旅游促进与发展基金”的支持、被追讨贷款以及征收附加费。

这是韩国今年提出的第三项此类法案。此前，内阁已通过加强监管的施行令，规定酒店及住宿业者若未公开房价或违规加价，首次违规即可被勒令停业。

政府加强监管是因为近来接获越来越多国内外消费者的投诉，指部分住宿业者在国际会议、节庆活动或演唱会等大型活动前大幅抬高房价，或取消已确认的订房，再以更高价格接受预订。

韩国拟严打大型活动期间 酒店民宿业者漫天要价

2026年8月2日 19:54 / 联合早报

韩国男团“防弹少年团”日前宣布将在釜山举行巡演，就有歌迷反映房价被大幅调涨，或原本已预订的客房遭无故取消，引发舆论关注。 （法新社）

韩国男团“防弹少年团”日前宣布将在釜山举行巡演，就有歌迷反映房价被大幅调涨，或原本已预订的客房遭无故取消，引发舆论关注。 （法新社）

（首尔讯）韩国政府拟进一步规范住宿业经营行为， 当地酒店和爱彼迎（Airbnb）民宿业者若在大型活动前漫天要价及无故取消订房，将面临处罚。

《韩国先驱报》报道，7月31日，一项包含上述措施的《旅游促进法》修正案被正式提出。这项法案将强制要求住宿提供方公开价格，并禁止不合理涨价和取消预订等不公平经营行为。

根据法案，违规者可能面临多种制裁，包括限制获取“旅游促进与发展基金”的支持、被追讨贷款以及征收附加费。

这是韩国今年提出的第三项此类法案。此前，内阁已通过加强监管的施行令，规定酒店及住宿业者若未公开房价或违规加价，首次违规即可被勒令停业。

政府加强监管是因为近来接获越来越多国内外消费者的投诉，指部分住宿业者在国际会议、节庆活动或演唱会等大型活动前大幅抬高房价，或取消已确认的订房，再以更高价格接受预订。

Liberal court stuns with ruling that hands Trump major immigration win

July 31, 2026 11:15am EDT / Fox News

The panel of two Biden appointees and one Trump appointee ruled on TPS for migrants from South Sudan and Ethiopia

By Elaine Mallon Fox News

DHS Chief Counsel James Percival said a group of federal district judges—not the judiciary as a whole—are repeatedly blocking deportations and Temporary Protected Status rollbacks despite SCOTUS rulings, calling it “naked political activism.”

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

blob:https://www.foxnews.com/7e22d56a-15a5-4843-b19a-e834ee6f6102

Listen to this article

4 min

A liberal-led federal appeals court handed President Donald Trump two immigration victories Wednesday, reversing separate district court orders that had delayed the termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for migrants from South Sudan and Ethiopia.

The judgments from the First Circuit Court of Appeals come after U.S. District Judges Brian Murphy and Patti Saris issued back-to-back orders temporarily blocking the Trump administration’s termination of TPS for Ethiopia and South Sudan, respectively, late last week. The rulings drew sharp criticism from legal experts and Trump administration officials, who called the judges “rogue” and argued their decisions defied the Supreme Court.

The three-judge First Circuit panel consisted of Judges Julie Rikelman and Seth Aframe, both appointed by President Joe Biden, and Judge Joshua Dunlap, who was appointed by President Donald Trump.

BIDEN JUDGE BLOCKING ETHIOPIAN DEPORTATIONS DESPITE SCOTUS RULING CLASHED WITH ICE BEFORE

President Donald Trump during an announcement in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., on July 29, 2026.(Aaron Schwartz/CNP/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

SUPREME COURT WEIGHS TRUMP EFFORT TO TERMINATE TEMPORARY PROTECTIONS FOR HAITIAN, SYRIAN MIGRANTS

In nearly identical rulings, the majority liberal panel found that the lower court judges’ orders conflicted with the Supreme Court’s decision in Mullin v. Doe, which held that courts cannot block TPS terminations based on non-constitutional claims.

“Mullin held that ‘the TPS statute’s judicial-review bar applies to all non-constitutional claims’ challenging the Secretary of Homeland Security’s determination with respect to the termination of a TPS designation,” the judges wrote.

Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan told Fox News Digital that the First Circuit correctly applied the precedent established by the Supreme Court.

“These are clear wins for President Trump following his big win at the U.S. Supreme Court, explaining that district courts are not supposed to second guess TPS terminations, and even as this plays out, we’re moving towards the end of this litigation because district courts should not be hearing these disputes, and that’s what the Supreme Court said,” Wessan told Fox News Digital.

U.S. President Donald Trump takes questions from the media during a bilateral meeting with President of Lebanon Joseph Aoun in the Oval Office of the White House on July 21, 2026 in Washington, DC. U.S. District Court Judge Patti Saris attends the opening ceremony for the Justice Stephen G. Breyer Community Learning Center on Courts and the Constitution at the federal courthouse in Boston, Massachusetts, U.S., March 25, 2025.(Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images; Brian Snyder/Reuters)

SUPREME COURT’S LATEST IMMIGRATION RULING WILL CAUSE AMERICANS TO ‘DIE AND SUFFER’ ATTORNEY WARNS

A Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spokesperson welcomed the rulings as “a win for the rule of law and common sense.”

“Temporary Protected Status is exactly that—temporary,” the spokesperson said in a statement to Fox News Digital. “For too long, TPS has been allowed to function as a de facto amnesty program despite Congress never intending it to be permanent.”

The lawsuits were brought by African Communities Together, a New York-based immigrant advocacy organization that serves as the lead plaintiff in both cases, alongside individual TPS recipients from Ethiopia and South Sudan. The plaintiffs argue DHS unlawfully ended the protections in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution, alleging the agency failed to properly assess conditions in the two countries and that the decisions were motivated by racial discrimination.

Murphy and Saris temporarily blocked the Trump administration from terminating TPS last week, issuing procedural orders to preserve the status quo while they considered whether the plaintiffs should be permitted to amend their complaints to pursue renewed constitutional claims.

DHS EVISCERATES MEDIA FOR ‘ABSOLUTE ABSURDITY’ OVER CONCERN ABOUT ‘WORST OF THE WORST’ ACTIVIST JUDGES LIST

While the Supreme Court’s decision in Mullin v. Doe foreclosed most statutory challenges to TPS terminations, it left open the possibility that courts could consider claims alleging constitutional violations.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy has temporarily blocked key Trump administration decisions to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS)(United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary/ REUTERS/Nathan Howard)

However, Wessan said the district judges were operating outside the “legal bounds” by blocking the TPS terminations before any constitutional claims had been established.

“If they want to let the plaintiffs amend their complaint, they’re allowed to do that, but in the meantime, TPS is over,” Wessan told Fox News Digital.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The First Circuit’s decisions mark the latest setback for Murphy and Saris after the Trump administration accused both judges of effectively sidestepping the Supreme Court’s June ruling. After Murphy’s order, DHS General Counsel James Percival wrote on X that the district judge was engaged in “mutiny against the Supreme Court,” while he described Saris’ ruling as “open defiance” of the justices’ decision.

Fox News Digital reached out to the offices of Murphy and Saris for comment.

Elaine Mallon is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business covering national politics.

Trump defends DOJ weaponization fund and attacks Cornyn, further imperiling Blanche nomination

Jul 31, 2026, 8:15 AM ET / CNN

By Kit Maher

Updated Jul 31, 2026, 9:56 AM ET

President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement about Dulles International Airport renovations with Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC on July 29, 2026.

Ken Cedeno/AFP/Getty Images

President Donald Trump said acting Attorney General Todd Blanche “should be immediately approved” as his permanent pick for for the role and defended a controversial $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund” that’s at the crux of why the nomination has not yet moved forward.

Trump’s comments in a social media post on Friday come a day after the president said he wouldn’t object to “temporarily withdrawing” Blanche’s nomination until after the Republicans who are withholding their support, Texas Sen. John Cornyn and North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, are out of office.

While Blanche has already said the controversial fund is “dead” and the Justice Department told courts the program was abandoned, Cornyn has demanded written assurances that the fund will not be revived.

Cornyn has been adamant that he also wants Blanche to clarify an addendum to that agreement which offers the president and members of his family tax immunity. The senator wants Blanche to explicitly acknowledge that it only applies to past tax investigations against the president and those listed in the lawsuit that was settled.

The demands have left Blanche in a difficult place, as putting limits on the tax addendum could anger the president.

In the Friday post, the president again criticized Cornyn and insisted that the fund, which was the result of a settlement agreement between Trump and the Internal Revenue Service, would not have benefitted him personally. Rather, he said it was intended for those “whose lives were unfairly and illegally destroyed” by the Biden administration.

“I felt that they should be given compensation for what has been done to them,” Trump said.

While he stopped short of calling for a renewal of the fund, Trump defended its imposition and claimed that Cornyn “never had a problem” with it. He continued to suggest the reason Cornyn is withholding support for Blanche is personal — given that Trump endorsed Ken Paxton, his primary opponent in Texas, who went on to win the race.

Trump suggested earlier this week that Cornyn was putting up a fight in the Senate, since he didn’t offer his endorsement.

“Maybe John Cornyn’s upset with me because I didn’t endorse him. I don’t know what it is, but I haven’t heard that there’s a problem,” the president said from the Oval Office on Wednesday.

Cornyn has denied that Trump’s endorsement of his primary opponent factored into his decision. He also said the president’s potential withdrawal of the nominee would not solve any problems.

“I think the DOJ needs a Senate-confirmed attorney general, and Todd Blanche is probably about as good as we’re going to get, and so I just think they need to do what Todd Blanche swore that this deal meant. They need to put that in writing so it’s enforceable. And so far, they have been unwilling to do that,” Cornyn said on Thursday.

This story has been updated with additional information.

Trump defends ‘anti-weaponization’ fund as Blanche nomination stalls

By Reuters
July 31, 2026 12:35 PM UTC Updated 3 hours ago

[1/2]Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche testifies before a Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on his nomination to be attorney general, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., July 15, 2026. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst/ File Photo

WASHINGTON, July 31 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday defended his proposed “anti-weaponization” fund amid a standoff with fellow Republicans in the Senate that has stalled his bid to get acting U.S. Attorney General Todd ​Blanche in the role permanently.

“Todd Blanche, a good man, should be immediately approved as ‌U.S. Attorney General,” Trump wrote in a social media post, one day after threatening to withdraw the nomination until next year after two key opposing senators leave office.

Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

He also continued to defend the fund, writing: “I will always feel that ​these victims of government abuse should be paid back for what they were forced to ​endure, their lives have been ruined!”

Republican Senators John Cornyn and Thom Tillis have held ⁠up Blanche’s nomination while seeking written assurances that the Justice Department will not set up the $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” ​program. Trump critics have derided it as a slush fund to reward supporters with taxpayer money.

The two ​lawmakers, whose Senate terms end in early January, were closer to an agreement after meeting with Blanche late Thursday afternoon, according to a person familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Blanche has also met with Republican Senator ​John Curtis.

Despite the dispute, Blanche likely does not need to be confirmed to effectively serve as attorney ​general for Trump’s remaining term in the White House, given that acting officials can serve as long as their ‌nomination ⁠is pending in the Senate and their nomination is not formally rejected or withdrawn.

The “anti-weaponization” fund was crafted as part of a legal settlement between Trump and the Justice Department to resolve his $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over allegedly mishandling his tax records, but it was put on hold amid ​opposition from congressional Republicans.

The ​fund could benefit Trump ⁠allies who have said they were unfairly targeted by the federal government for their involvement in the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol after ​Trump lost his re-election bid in 2020.

blob:https://www.reuters.com/e488ce82-5024-4634-8b33-d5ec9335f608

Cornyn on Thursday said he was ​waiting for the ⁠Justice Department to formalize assurances that it would not implement the fund. Cornyn and Tillis also object to an IRS deal that would prevent tax audits of Trump and his associates.

Trump, in his post ⁠on Friday, ​also referred to the fund in present tense, writing that ​it “will not benefit me, but rather the great American Patriots who were hunted down like dogs and whose lives were unfairly and ​illegally destroyed.”

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Reporting by Susan Heavey; additional reporting by Richard Cowan and Dan Rosenzweig-Ziff; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

山火逼近 希腊下令雅典郊区部分居民疏散

2026年7月31日 23:08 / 联合早报

7月31日，海达里附近野火产生的浓烟笼罩希腊首都雅典。 （路透社）

据紧急手机警报显示，希腊民防部门下令首都雅典西部郊区海达里的部分居民疏散，原因是附近山上发生森林火灾。

法新社报道，海达里（Haidari）位于雅典市中心以西约11公里处。消防员说，火灾发生在郊区附近的一座山上。

新华社早前引述希腊气候危机与民防部发布的最新预警说，雅典所在的阿提卡大区、埃维亚地区、基克拉泽斯群岛以及北爱琴海部分岛屿森林火险等级极高。

山火逼近 希腊下令雅典郊区部分居民疏散

2026年7月31日 23:08 / 联合早报

7月31日，海达里附近野火产生的浓烟笼罩希腊首都雅典。 （路透社）

据紧急手机警报显示，希腊民防部门下令首都雅典西部郊区海达里的部分居民疏散，原因是附近山上发生森林火灾。

法新社报道，海达里（Haidari）位于雅典市中心以西约11公里处。消防员说，火灾发生在郊区附近的一座山上。

新华社早前引述希腊气候危机与民防部发布的最新预警说，雅典所在的阿提卡大区、埃维亚地区、基克拉泽斯群岛以及北爱琴海部分岛屿森林火险等级极高。