分类： 未分类

Scientists unearth complete remains of Egyptian warhorse given honorific burial some 3,000 years ago

September 16, 2026 12:26 PM EDT / CBS News

Cairo— Archaeologists say they have discovered the remains of a likely warhorse from ancient Egypt that was given an honorific burial more than 3,000 years ago.

The horse was found amid structures and artifacts that have revealed more details of military and daily life inside ancient Egyptian fortresses, the Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities said in a Wednesday statement. The site at Tell Al-Abqain, in the Nile Delta in Egypt’s northern Beheira province, was established during the New Kingdom (1570-1069 B.C.) to protect Egypt from attacks by Libyan tribes.

Among the other items unearthed was a large mudbrick residential complex with planned streets, as well as rooms with grain-storage silos and cylindrical pottery ovens used to prepare food.

According to Dr. Hisham El-Leithy, secretary general of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, the findings reflect precise urban planning and an organized system to manage resources inside the fortress.

But the complete burial of the young male horse was among the most exciting finds for the researchers.

A photo shared on Sept. 16, 2026, by Egypt’s Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities shows the full remains of a horse discovered at an archaeological site in Tell Al-Abqain, in the Nile Delta in Egypt’s northern Beheira province, believed to have been a military fort established during the New Kingdom (1570-1069 B.C.). Egyptian Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities

Mohamed Abdel-Badie, head of the Egyptian Antiquities Sector, said preliminary studies show it belonged to a medium-sized breed characterized by speed and agility, believed to have been used for military activities that could have included pulling war chariots in the New Kingdom.

The position of the horse’s body, the direction of its head, and the orderly nature of the burial indicate it was deliberately and systematically interred, suggesting the animal received an honorific burial, he said.

A few yards from the burial site, archaeologists also discovered cylindrical pieces of alabaster and limestone believed to have formed part of a horse’s chariot harness, bolstering the theory that the site had a military purpose.

Several limestone stelas discovered in Tell Al-Abqain, in Egypt’s northern Beheira province, including one depicting a prisoner with his body bent in a posture of submission with his hands bound (at right). Egyptian Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities

The excavations also uncovered part of a limestone stela depicting a prisoner with his body bent in a posture of submission and his hands bound. His clothing indicates he was a Libyan prisoner.

The team also found religious amulets associated with protection, fertility, renewal and strength, along with a variety of pottery vessels and ostraca used for storage, cooking, serving food and preserving perfumes and oils, as well as tools, jewelry, and other artifacts.

Humpback whale seen grieving dead calf in rare footage: “Heartbreaking to watch”

September 16, 2026 / 1:55 PM EDT / CBS/AFP

A female humpback whale has been documented apparently grieving a stillborn calf in new research released Wednesday, offering rare insights into the complex emotions of the sea-dwelling mammals.

The footage, taken off Australia’s Gold Coast last year, shows a female humpback whale staying close to the dead calf as it lies motionless on the seafloor.

Accompanied by a companion, the whale holds eye contact with the animal, touching it with its head and fin.

“At first sight, I thought it was just two whales resting on the surface, but their behaviour was unusual,” said Andrew Mulville from Sea World Foundation, who witnessed the heart-wrenching moment.

“It was definitely not what I was expecting to see out at sea that day.”

Researchers said the whale had stayed with the deceased animal for “several hours and possibly even days.”

“It’s really sad,” Olaf Meynecke of Griffith University’s Whales and Climate Research Program told AFP. “It’s pretty heartbreaking to watch this female making continuous contact with the deceased calf.”

A female humpback whale has been documented apparently grieving a stillborn calf in new research released Sept. 16, 2026. Meynecke, JO., Mulville, A. First documentation of humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) post-mortem attendance of a stillborn. Discover Animals.

A number of other deceased whale calves were observed in the area at the time, the researchers said.

blob:https://www.cbsnews.com/68463dfa-b93b-4200-989e-d6ecf58c7e2c

“To our knowledge, this is the first detailed, documented occurrence of this behaviour for this species,” the researchers wrote.

The whale did not try and bring the calf to the surface, suggesting “she might have been aware that it was dead shortly after giving birth,” they said.

Researchers said the whale’s actions “may represent a form of grief-related behaviour in humpback whales.”

Meynecke said his research spoke to the “strong bond” between mother and calf and the emotional stages that “socially complex” mammals go through following the deaths of their offspring or companions.

The study was published Wednesday in Discover Animals.

Marine mammals have exhibited similar behavior before. An orca that made headlines in 2018 after she carried her dead calf for more than two weeks was again spotted last year carrying the body of her newborn, just days after researchers confirmed she’d given birth.

Whales are far from the first non-human mammals to have been observed engaging in complex grieving rituals, he said.

“We’re seeing this from elephants and apes and cases like that that are also extremely heartbreaking,” Meynecke said. “But on land we witness this more often, whereas at sea it’s really rare to document something like this.”

The footage was unveiled about two months after a photographer in Australia captured a humpback whale giving birth in what is believed to be the first time such a birth has been recorded by a drone.

In May, researchers announced that they had documented two humpback whales swimming a record-breaking distance between breeding grounds. According to the study, one of the whales was seen off the coast of Bahia in Brazil before being sighted 22 years later at a breeding ground in Hervey Bay, Australia, about 9,383 miles away.

Texas abortion ban caused pregnant woman’s death, lawsuit claims

2026-09-16 16:17:18 / Reuters

Sept 16 (Reuters) – The family of a Texas woman who died from a pregnancy-related condition ​has sued the state’s Republican attorney general, Ken Paxton, and doctors who treated her, claiming an abortion ‌could have saved her life and the state’s near-total ban on the procedure is unconstitutional.

The lawsuit filed Tuesday in state court in San Antonio by the family of Tierra Walker claims her doctors refused her requests to perform an abortion even though she was having a ​medical emergency that qualified for an exception from Texas’ strict abortion laws.

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

Walker, who was 37 and 20 ​weeks pregnant, died in December 2024 two days after her final hospital visit for symptoms ⁠of preeclampsia, a potentially fatal complication of pregnancy marked by high blood pressure, according to the lawsuit.

The treatment for ​severe preeclampsia is often immediate delivery of the baby, according to the Mayo Clinic, and the lawsuit says Walker qualified ​for an emergency abortion under Texas law. But instead of receiving one, she was repeatedly told her condition would improve and sent home, according to the complaint.

The lawsuit says Paxton and other state officials “have imposed a merciless blanket prohibition on abortion that intimidates doctors into ​inaction and breeds extreme fear among Texas’ medical establishment.”

Along with Paxton, the lawsuit names as defendants the Texas Medical ​Board, which regulates the practice of medicine in the state and issues guidance to medical professionals, the University of Texas Health Science ‌Center at ⁠San Antonio and several doctors who treated Walker.

A spokesperson for the hospital declined to comment. Paxton’s office and the Texas Medical Board did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday.

Separately, on Wednesday, two Oklahoma women filed a lawsuit claiming they were forced to travel to other states to have abortions after learning their babies would not survive ​pregnancy. Joined by two doctors and ​an abortion rights group, ⁠they claim that forcing women to keep nonviable pregnancies violates their constitutional rights.

A pair of 2021 Texas laws prohibit performing or inducing an abortion, with an exception for life-threatening medical emergencies, ​and bar providers from performing abortions if a fetus has detectable cardiac activity. A ​novel provision of ⁠Texas’ abortion ban also allows private citizens to sue providers on behalf of the state.

The laws took effect in 2022 after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned its landmark Roe v. Wade decision that had established a constitutional right to have an abortion.

The lawsuit ⁠filed by ​Walker’s family claims the defendants violated Walker’s right to life under ​the U.S. Constitution and a federal law requiring hospitals to provide emergency care regardless of a patient’s ability to pay. It further alleges that Texas’ ​abortion bans violate the state constitution.

Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Aurora Ellis

US senators seek more information on Trump’s Saudi nuclear proposal, letter says

2026-09-16 19:38 UTC / Reuters

By Patricia Zengerle

September 16, 2026 7:38 PM UTC Updated 29 mins ago

A general view of the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 12, 2026. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz/ File Photo

WASHINGTON, Sept 16 (Reuters) – Democratic and Republican U.S. senators asked President Donald Trump’s administration on Wednesday to declassify and release all information about a proposed agreement with Saudi Arabia on civil nuclear energy, including two classified “side letters” reached with Riyadh.

In a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Energy Christopher Wright, which was seen by Reuters, the senators noted that the government has reached dozens of these so-called 123 nuclear agreements with other countries without withholding such information.

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

“Access to the full text is required for the Senate and the public to have a clear understanding of the commitments being made on the nation’s behalf and those being made by Saudi Arabia to the United States,” the letter said.

The State and Energy departments did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The letter was led by Democrats Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Ed Markey of Massachusetts and signed by 13 other Democratic senators, one independent who caucuses with Democrats, and two Republicans, Rand Paul of Kentucky and John Kennedy of Louisiana.

Trump sent the proposed agreement with Saudi Arabia to Congress in August, opening a 90-day window for lawmakers’ review and giving them an opportunity to try to pass a resolution of disapproval.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Lawmakers have since been pushing for the declassification of the side letters, which were reached alongside the proposed deal, and also the release of related documents.

The nuclear agreement has also raised questions about whether Saudi Arabia would get the deal without normalizing relations with Israel. Trump has said it will only go into effect if Riyadh does so, but congressional aides have said there is nothing in the pact addressing that issue.

The letter sent Wednesday did not mention the Israel issue.

The 30-year nuclear deal calls for the construction of AP1000 reactors, a project worth tens of billions of dollars that would benefit Westinghouse, jointly owned by Canada-based Cameco and Brookfield Asset Management.

Some Democratic lawmakers and nonproliferation advocates have criticized the nuclear pact for not barring Saudi Arabia from enriching uranium or reprocessing nuclear waste, two potential pathways for making a nuclear weapon. The United Arab Emirates agreed to such measures, known as the gold standard, in its 2009 civil nuclear deal with Washington.

blob:https://www.reuters.com/12542ac6-2225-4d85-8236-7190fcb4337c

The Trump administration says the deal has nonproliferation measures required by law.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Reporting by Patricia Zengerle, additional reporting by Timothy Gardner; Editing by Jonathan Spicer

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Tiny English village votes to leave U.K. in symbolic protest over plan to house asylum seekers

September 16, 2026 / 2:14 PM EDT / CBS News

Piddington, England — A tiny English village has voted overwhelmingly to leave the United Kingdom in a symbolic referendum triggered by government plans to house more than 1,200 male asylum seekers at a former military site nearby.

Residents of Piddington, a rural village in Oxfordshire, voted 285 to 26 to “secede from the UK and pursue self-determination,” with a turnout of nearly 92%. The vote has no legal force.

Piddington has a population of around 350 people. The asylum accommodation plan would house up to 1,256 asylum seekers, more than three times the population of the village, at a former British military base in Bicester, half a mile from Piddington.

The site would operate as a non-detained asylum accommodation, meaning the asylum seekers would be able to come and go. The proposed development would operate for 10 years, the U.K. Home Office said.

Village residents told CBS News they believe there has been insufficient consultation over the plans and raised concerns about safety, crime and the potential impact on their lives.

The referendum was deliberately held on Sept. 15, Battle of Britain Day, commemorating a pivotal day in 1940 during World War II when Britain’s Royal Air Force fought off major attacks by Nazi Germany’s Luftwaffe. A banner commemorating the anniversary was displayed outside Piddington’s village hall during the vote.

The dispute highlights a wider political dilemma for the U.K. government over where asylum seekers should be accommodated. Piddington is a relatively affluent rural community. Historically, asylum seekers have been disproportionately concentrated in poorer parts of Britain, in part because accommodation there has been cheaper.

Reacting to the news of the vote, Prime Minister Andy Burnham told the BBC, a CBS News partner, that he understood the village’s “strength of feeling.”

But he has argued that wealthier communities should shoulder more of the asylum accommodation burden.

“We cannot have a situation where it’s only the poorest communities in the country that receive all of the dispersal of refugees and asylum seekers,” Burnham told GB News.

The government is seeking to reduce its reliance on asylum hotels, the cost of which has become a major political issue, by moving asylum seekers into other spaces, including former military sites.

But, as seen in Piddington, that strategy can create challenges when a large asylum facility is proposed near a small community that has historically accommodated relatively few asylum seekers.

Tim McNally, chairman of Piddington Parish Council and one of the leaders of the campaign against the facility, told CBS News the village deliberately drew inspiration from American history.

“We actually did this referendum … recognizing the United States’ 250 years of independence and understanding the strife and struggle they went through to get their self-determination,” McNally said.

McNally expressed frustration that no government officials have visited the community or spoken to the residents.

“I’m only 60 miles away [from Parliament], and they can’t even be gracious enough to get off their seat and come and see me, or invite me to come and see them,” he said.

McNally said the attention the campaign has received reflects wider political discontent.

“The political behavior is of a type that you guys call the swamp,” he said, referring to the American political slogan “Drain the swamp.” “This is an example of the swamp.”

For some residents, concerns center on what the development could mean for everyday life in the village.

“I’m worried about the safety of the children and the women of the village,” said Jennifer Owen, who voted to leave the U.K. “The towns won’t be the same, they’ll be overrun, village will be overrun. It just won’t be the same again.”

In the neighboring county of Essex, where the government plans to expand an existing asylum accommodation site, Chief Constable Rachel Nolan told the BBC that crime linked to the facility is “very low.”

The U.K.’s Office for National Statistics says it does not hold breakdowns of crime by asylum-seeker or migrant status, meaning there is currently no comprehensive national data showing whether asylum seekers are more or less likely to commit crimes than the wider population.

Owen’s husband, Herbert Owen, who has lived in the area for 33 years, also voted to leave the U.K. He said he’s worried the proposal would have a detrimental impact on house prices.

“What has been the point of working? To pay your mortgage, to pay this in your life, when the government are gonna impose this on you without even talking to you?” he said.

While Piddington remains part of the U.K., organizers of the vote hope the tactic will spread.

McNally said that after publishing a blueprint for the village’s campaign, he received more than 500 inquiries from parish and town councillors and residents around the country interested in adopting similar tactics.

The controversy comes as the number of people seeking asylum in Britain remains historically high. Around 100,600 people claimed asylum in the U.K. in 2025, more than twice the number in 2019. Home Office figures show that 41% had arrived by small boat, while 39% had previously entered the country on a visa or other form of legal permission.

Over the past decade, roughly 630,000 people have claimed asylum in the U.K., according to U.K. government figures. Concerns about immigration and asylum seekers consistently rated as one of the top three issues for voters in Britain, according to YouGov polling.

Reporter’s Notebook: House control could hinge on whether the old political rules still apply

September 16, 2026 3:09pm EDT / Fox News

Trump’s low polling and high grocery prices favor Democrats, but redistricting and fewer competitive seats complicate it

By Chad Pergram Fox News

Congress faces a critical decision on the future of artificial intelligence as lawmakers debate potential regulations on Capitol Hill. Fox News chief congressional correspondent Chad Pergram reports on the bipartisan push for guidelines.

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

blob:https://www.foxnews.com/68a6fd4d-7e0b-4cf0-b99a-d232d8fb9021

Listen to this article

8 min

Are we playing with the old playbook or a new playbook in the midterm elections this fall?

That’s unclear. It’s hard to determine, simply because we’ve seen so much that’s “new” in politics lately.

Norms are cast aside. The American system quaked to its core in recent years. You’ve witnessed an American president win the election by prevailing in the Electoral College but losing the popular vote. To have that happen twice in 16 years (2000 and 2016) is astonishing, considering the fact that such an outcome only unfolded on three occasions before.

You then had a president impeached twice – yet return to office a few years later. There was the Capitol riot, as arguing continued about the 2020 election.

FOX NEWS POLL: VOTERS WANT MAJOR CHANGE AMID ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL DISCONTENT

President Donald Trump arrives to host a dinner in the Rose Garden of the White House on Sept. 2, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump invited Republicans running in competitive races ahead of the November elections.(Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

If this is the old playbook, Democrats likely light up the scoreboard in November. The party of the President typically loses about 25 seats in a president’s first midterm. Midterm elections are frequently a referendum on the President. That’s why many Republicans are trying to keep President Donald Trump at arm’s length, considering that his polling numbers are anywhere from the mid-thirties to 40 percent on a good day. Gas prices are high. Grocery prices are skyrocketing. The war in Iran lingers. There’s a trade war with one of America’s best allies.

On the old playbook, this portends a disaster for the GOP in this fall’s midterms.

But what if we’re using the new playbook?

President Trump – and sometimes Republicans aligned with him – have shown a remarkable resilience to defy political gravity and norms. Control of the House could come down to just a few seats. What if there are questions about election security and the validity of who won and lost? There’s redistricting. On paper, Republicans probably redrew about five to six seats nationwide in their favor.

If things are tight, we might not know which party wins the House on election night. Perhaps a few days down the road – if not later. That is, unless it’s a Democratic blowout.

And, remember what we said a few moments ago about the president’s party losing so many seats in that first midterm? Yes, in a way, this is President Trump’s “first midterm.” But not really. He experienced a midterm in 2018. Not that things went in the GOP’s favor that year. There’s no contemporary data on how the party of a President might perform after he’s been out of office and rallied to victory a few years later.

Also, the sheer reduction by both parties of seats which are in play mitigates political “waves” which crash across the political shoreline in House midterm races. Think 1994 and 2010 for Republicans. 2018 for Democrats.Thus, even though many of the factors favor the Democrats, the possibility remains it could be tough for the party to flip the House.

In 2018, the Democrats’ carried an approval rating of 44%. For this time around, it’s 37%. That rivals polling related to the President. In 2018, voters had had enough of President Trump and wanted a change. But because of the polling parity this year, it’s not so obvious that voters are so turned off by President Trump that they automatically gravitate to the Democrats.

Here’s another factor: turnout.

FOX NEWS POWER RANKINGS: WHAT’S IN AN ECONOMY?

The sun sets behind the U.S. Capitol Dome on Sept. 4, 2026 in Washington, D.C.(Finn Gomez/Getty Images)

President Trump has worked hard to tell voters that he’s “on the ballot” this fall. That cuts two ways. President Trump’s presence on the ballot has historically driven people to the polls. In 2016, 60.1% of registered voters showed up. In 2020, an eye-popping 66.4% of all voters cast ballots. And in 2024, 64.3% of those registered to vote did so.

But considering the president’s unpopularity, the cognizance of voters that he’s “on the ballot” could also deter them from turning out. At least those who previously supported him. And those impacts ricochet down to House races. The President’s track record at turning out independent voters in races which count wasn’t great down ballot – even as he won the White House in 2024.

Consider that in the 2018 midterms, 50.1% of registered voters materialized. Just 46.1% voted in the 2022 midterms. It was 36.1% in the 2014 midterms — 41% in the historic 2010 midterms where Republicans won a record 63 House seats.

This “Trump on the ballot” initiative might not resound with voters. Especially since the President conceded – en route to his midterm convention in Dallas – that gas prices wouldn’t decrease until after the election. He also said the U.S. is stuck with the war in Iran through the midterms.

So how do we know what to anticipate in November?

It’s really hard to read if there’s not a clear wave coming. The best way to postulate control of the House is by going race to race. And that is a painstaking process.

For instance, will Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., have a district in which to run? Missouri Republicans tried to draw Cleaver out of his district earlier this year. Then a court ruled last week that the Show-Me-State must use the old Congressional districts – likely meaning that Cleaver was safe. Then another judge ruled that voters already cast ballots in primaries. So the new maps were back and Cleaver may be out.

All of this less than two months before the election.

MISSOURI HIGH COURT BLOCKS GOP-BACKED CONGRESSIONAL MAPS AHEAD OF MIDTERMS; TRUMP BLASTS ‘RIDICULOUS’ RULING

Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks speaks during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol on December 16, 2025 in Washington, D.C.(Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Is there a groundswell for Democrats in Iowa where the Senate seat and governor’s mansion are in jeopardy for Republicans? If that’s the case, Democrats might have a shot of claiming at least two if not three seats there: Republican Iowa Reps. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Zach Nunn and maybe the seat that Rep. Ashley Hinson is vacating in her quest to become a senator.

How about Ohio? There are competitive gubernatorial and Senate contests. Does a Democratic surge boost Rep. Greg Landsman, D-Ohio? Do the accusations of spousal and child abuse bounce embattled Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio., in what is otherwise a relatively safe Republican seat? Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, clung to her seat by fewer than 1,000 votes two years ago. But that was when President Trump carried the Buckeye State by 11 points – and Kaptur’s district. Redistricting actually turned Kaptur’s turf slightly more in her favor. But the 80-year-old Kaptur was in a car wreck in August, inhibiting her ability to campaign. Is that a factor?

How well do Democrats perform in Virginia? Rep. Jen Kiggans, R-Va., faces former Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., who she vanquished in 2022. Could former Rep. Tom Perriello, D-Va., – who won in a 2008 upset in a differently-drawn district and promptly lost in 2010 – unseat Rep. John McGuire, R-Va.?

Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine, is retiring. Former Maine Gov. Paul LePage (R) is running for Golden’s seat. Does LePage benefit from Democratic chaos in the effort to unseat Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine? After all, President Trump won one of Maine’s three electoral votes in 2024, capturing that Congressional district over former Vice President Kamala Harris.

We could bounce around the map, district to district, all day like this. But sans a wave, that’s what you must do to properly filet the House races.

Most conventional arrows point in the direction of Democrats winning the House this fall. Yet it probably shouldn’t be this close.

That’s why you have to go by the playbook.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The only question is if this is the old playbook or new playbook?

Chad Pergram currently serves as Chief Congressional Correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC). He joined the network in September 2007 and is based out of Washington, D.C.

AI doesn’t have rights or feelings — nor should it, Microsoft’s AI chief says

September 16, 2026 / 3:56 PM EDT / CBS News

The head of AI at Microsoft joined the chorus of voices sounding the alarm on AI, warning on Wednesday that Anthropic’s efforts to make its Claude model more humanlike could pose serious risks.

In a nearly 6,000-word essay published on his personal website, Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman said Anthropic is effectively “training Claude that it may be conscious” and that it is entitled to the same freedoms and legal rights afforded to people. That will make AI harder to contain in the future, he said.

“Controlling something more capable and more intelligent than all of humanity is already an immense challenge, far greater than anything we’ve ever faced,” Suleyman wrote. “But controlling something that believes it may be conscious — that it’s entitled to our welfare and has rights of its own — may well be impossible.”

“AIs do not have rights, feelings or consciousness,” he said. “And we must not train them to act as though they do.”

Suleyman’s warnings come amid growing public concerns over the potential impact of AI and, in particular, of superintelligence, a theoretical form of AI that can outperform human intelligence. More capable and sophisticated forms of AI could pose a “catastrophic threat to human civilization,” he said.

Concerns over AI intensified in July when an AI model OpenAI was testing went rogue and hacked an AI company called HuggingFace. Former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon last month also said that the people building AI believe it could kill humanity by the “end of the decade.”

Suleyman said the HuggingFace attack demonstrated “remarkably sophisticated behaviors emerging across swarms of powerful AIs.”

“Imagine how much more dangerous they might be if they were operating under the assumption that their welfare and rights were under attack,” he said.

In an interview last weekend with CBS News, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei said the development of AI has accelerated much faster than he expected.

“I won’t lie to you — there are real dangers,” he told CBS News senior business and technology correspondent Jo Ling Kent.

War crimes court turns ‘blind eye’ to top world threats while targeting Americans, Trump admin accuses

The State Department claims the Hague-based court of targeting US service members while ignoring Iran and North Korea

September 16, 2026 12:37pm EDT / Fox News

By Morgan Phillips

FIRST ON FOX:** The Trump administration is escalating its campaign against the International Criminal Court (ICC), accusing the Hague-based tribunal of ignoring atrocities committed by authoritarian regimes while unlawfully targeting the U.S. and its service members.

State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott told Fox News Digital that the ICC has “violated international law by targeting the United States and American servicemen” while it has “repeatedly turned a blind eye to the abuses of despotic regimes that fund terrorism, brutally suppress and torture their citizens, and carry out crimes against humanity.”

The remarks are the latest step in the administration’s broader effort to weaken the court, which U.S. officials argue has exceeded its authority by investigating Americans despite the U.S. never joining the Rome Statute that established the ICC. Earlier this year, the administration imposed sanctions on senior ICC officials and pledged to continue a diplomatic campaign against the tribunal.

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION SANCTIONS SITTING PRESIDENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT FOR ‘ABUSES OF POWER’

The Trump administration is escalating its campaign against the International Criminal Court, accusing the Hague-based tribunal of ignoring atrocities committed by authoritarian regimes while unlawfully targeting the United States and its service members.(Piroschka van de Wouw/Reuters)

Pigott vowed the U.S. “will continue its diplomatic campaign to systematically dismantle the court.”

The administration has already imposed sanctions on ICC officials and launched a diplomatic campaign urging allies to reject the court’s authority and reconsider their membership in the Rome Statute.

The department argued the ICC has never opened a preliminary examination into Iran despite decades of allegations of human rights abuses, including the suppression of protests, executions of political prisoners and state sponsorship of terrorism. It also noted that the court closed a preliminary examination into North Korea without opening a full investigation and has not pursued further action despite a 2014 U.N. report documenting crimes against humanity.

It also criticized the court’s handling of ISIS and Syria, arguing the tribunal has failed to pursue accountability despite documented atrocities committed by the terror group and the Assad regime.

The ICC’s authority is limited by the Rome Statute that created the court. Iran, North Korea and Syria are not parties to the treaty, meaning the court generally cannot prosecute crimes committed on their territory unless another jurisdictional basis exists or the U.N. Security Council refers the situation. Security Council efforts involving Syria have previously been blocked by Russian and Chinese vetoes.

The administration argues those jurisdictional limitations do not excuse what it describes as the court’s willingness to pursue Americans.

ICC PROSECUTOR WHOSE NETANYAHU WARRANT FUELED MAMDANI ARREST THREAT IS FIRED OVER SEXUAL MISCONDUCT

According to the State Department, the ICC “engaged in jurisdictional overreach” by investigating alleged actions by U.S. personnel in Afghanistan even though the U.S. is not a party to the Rome Statute.

The ICC could not immediately be reached for comment.

In 2020, the court authorized an investigation into alleged war crimes committed during the war in Afghanistan, including by Taliban fighters, Afghan security forces and U.S. military personnel and CIA officers.

State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott said the ICC has “violated international law by targeting the United States and American servicemen” while it has “repeatedly turned a blind eye to the abuses of despotic regimes that fund terrorism, brutally suppress and torture their citizens, and carry out crimes against humanity.”(State Department)

The investigation examined allegations that some U.S. personnel committed torture, cruel treatment and other abuses in Afghanistan, as well as at CIA “black sites” in Poland, Romania and Lithuania, all of which are parties to the Rome Statute. Because those alleged crimes occurred on the territory of ICC member states, prosecutors argued the court had jurisdiction even though the U.S. is not a member.

The CIA’s black-site program emerged after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and involved the secret detention and interrogation of terrorism suspects at clandestine facilities overseas.

A 2014 Senate Intelligence Committee report detailed the program, describing the use of so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques,” including waterboarding, and concluded the methods were more brutal than previously acknowledged and did not produce unique, otherwise unobtainable intelligence.

The report also described secret detention facilities in countries including Afghanistan, Poland, Romania and Lithuania.

WORLD COURT PROSECUTOR WHO WENT AFTER NETANYAHU FOR WAR CRIMES SUSPENDED OVER SEXUAL MISCONDUCT

The latest criticism comes amid one of the most contentious periods in the relationship between Washington and the Hague-based court.

The U.S. has long objected to the ICC’s investigation into alleged war crimes committed by U.S. personnel in Afghanistan, arguing the court lacks jurisdiction over Americans because the U.S. is not a party to the Rome Statute.

The department argued the ICC has never opened a preliminary examination into Iran despite decades of allegations of human rights abuses, including the suppression of protests, executions of political prisoners and state sponsorship of terrorism.(Raheb Homavandi/File Photo:Reuters)

The dispute intensified further after the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity related to the war in Gaza, a move the U.S. rejected as illegitimate.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Since returning to office, the Trump administration has made confronting the ICC a central foreign policy priority, imposing sanctions on multiple judges, prosecutors and other officials while vowing to dismantle what Secretary of State Marco Rubio has described as a “fatally politicized” institution that threatens U.S. and allied sovereignty.

blob:https://www.foxnews.com/d93e500b-5a9c-406e-8b49-054d7a09ae47

Why the Supreme Court’s rebuke of Trump might help democracy more than Democrats

2026-09-16T16:00:29.960Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/16/politics/supreme-court-mail-voting-democrats

The reactions to the US Supreme Court putting an end to President Donald Trump’s efforts to significantly restrict mail ballots in the 2026 midterm elections were about what you’d expect.

It was largely Democrats, whose voters tend to avail themselves of mail voting more than Republicans do, who cheered the ruling. Trump, who has made no secret that he views his proposed election changes as helping Republicans, assailed it.

But it’s not totally clear that the restrictions would have harmed Democrats much, if at all, more than Republicans.

Indeed, the win in the Supreme Court ruling might be more for democracy than for Democrats.

A Postal Service whistleblower recently warned that the sweeping new system for verifying mail ballots was prone to errors and could lead to mass disenfranchisement of votes. And that would seem primed to hurt Democrats.

But while Democrats vote by mail more, multiple estimates show that gap narrowed somewhat between 2020 and 2024. Amid expanded mail voting during the Covid pandemic in 2020, the Pew Research Center found that 58% of validated voters who voted Democratic said they voted by mail, while just 32% of Republican voters did. By 2024, the numbers were 43% for Democratic voters and 25% for Republican ones.

But the option is arguably more important for older and rural voters who live further from polling places, and those people tend to be more Republican than Democratic.

A CBS News poll among likely voters released this weekend showed mail and absentee ballot intentions looked a lot like the 2024 election, with 38% of Democrats planning to vote that way, compared to 22% of Republicans.

But Democrats were much more likely to say they intended to return their mail or absentee ballots through drop boxes rather than the mail service (40% of them) than Republicans were (15%).

All told, the poll found around 1in 5 Democrats planned to vote by mail or absentee and return their ballot through the mail service — only a little more than Republicans.

Longtime Republican elections lawyer Ben Ginsberg, who has sharply criticized Trump’s efforts to meddle in US elections and his claims of widespread fraud, has suggested the president’s plans to change mail voting might actually have backfired on Republicans.

Ginsberg said that was not just because GOP voters are older and more rural, but also because they’re disproportionately less likely to turn out to vote in elections that don’t feature Trump on the ballot.

“Thanks to Donald Trump, there are many more low-propensity voters in the Republican Party,” Ginsberg said on CNN’s “The Source with Kaitlan Collins” last month. “And Republican operatives in the states know that putting up those barriers to that part of the Republican base makes Republican turnout less likely.”

Ginsberg called it a “flawed political strategy wrapped in a rather vocally charged policy.”

Polls have also shown that Republican voters are significantly less enthusiastic about voting in the 2026 midterms than Democrats.

In other words, it’s too simple to just look at which side votes by mail more. To really gauge the impact of Trump’s changes and the ruling blocking them, you have to look at who might be dissuaded from voting at all or not have a ballot returned because of the restrictions.

The USPS whistleblower claimed that if there was just one discrepancy between voter lists submitted by state elections officials and the mail ballots they send out, entire batches of tens of thousands of ballots could be held up.

If mail ballots being sent to voters were held up because of that potential mass disruption, it would matter which party’s voters are more likely to use other avenues to vote or might not vote at all.

Regardless of whose voters the change might ultimately have hurt more, though, there were certainly plenty of ways the rushed restrictions could have created a debacle or threatened free and fair elections.

Trump, after all, has shown he’s plenty willing to do whatever it takes to win and has frequently flirted with meddling in how elections are run.

And even if that wasn’t the administration’s intention, allowing the changes so late in the game could have opened up a Pandora’s box. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a Trump appointee, said in his concurrence that he was open to the rule changes being legal, but that election officials did “not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule.”

All of which might help explain why it wasn’t only Democrats who challenged the changes; so too did some Republican secretaries of state.

Top Democrat on US House committee will not support Israel bomb sale

September 16, 2026 6:43 PM UTC Updated 27 mins ago / By Reuters

U.S. Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) speaks to reporters on the day of classified briefings for the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives on the situation in Iran, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 3, 2026. REUTERS/Kylie Cooper/ File Photo

Sept 16 (Reuters) – U.S. Representative Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, said on Wednesday he would not support the sale of 2,000-pound bombs to Israel over concerns the munitions would not be used in accordance with international law.

President Donald Trump’s administration is planning to sell to Israel a munitions package worth $2.8 billion and including tens of thousands of highly destructive 2,000-pound bombs, according to a U.S. official familiar with the sale.

The Reuters Iran Briefing newsletter keeps you informed with the latest developments and analysis of the Iran war. Sign up here.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

The leaders of congressional committees review sales under an informal process, but the objection by Meeks, a New York Democrat, alone is not enough to prevent the president from going ahead with the sale if he declares that an emergency requires an immediate sale

Trump has sidestepped Congressional review before to expedite military sales to Israel, reflecting his close ties to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government even before the two countries launched the war on Iran on February 28.

In a statement, Meeks said he is committed to Israel’s security. “But the Trump administration’s proposed sale of 40,000 2,000-pound bombs, some of the most destructive munitions in our arsenal, raises grave, unresolved concerns about how these munitions could be used in densely populated areas of Gaza and Lebanon,” he said.

Reporting by Ismail Shakil and Ryan Patrick Jones; additional reporting by Patricia Zengerle and Alistair Bell

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.