分类： 未分类

Unearthed El-Sayed essay draws explosive Trump-bin Laden parallel: ‘recruited, radicalized and reassured’

El-Sayed argued ‘racism’ was the only reason Trump wasn’t held accountable the same way the al-Qaeda leader was

August 14, 2026 12:02pm EDT / Fox News

Michigan Democrat grilled over rally with anti-Israel streamer who claims ‘America deserved 9/11’

Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed appeared with controversial anti-Israel streamer Hasan Piker, who claimed “America deserved 9/11” and condoned the October 7 attacks. Fox News contributor Miranda Devine criticized the progressive politician for political opportunism, arguing that such appearances normalize radical views. She raises concerns about the streamer’s unverified online followers and the spread of anti-American discourse.

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed compared President Donald Trump’s role in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot to Osama bin Laden’s role in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in a 2021 blog post that argued America has an obligation to hold the president accountable and “send the same message” it did after 9/11.

The post, which appeared on a blog El-Sayed has since made private, is titled “Why aren’t we treating Donald Trump like we treat other terrorists?” El-Sayed argued that racism explained what he described as a double standard in how the country responded to the terrorists behind 9/11 and Trump and his supporters after Jan. 6.

“I was a junior in high school 20 years ago when I watched the second plane hit the Twin Towers from my chemistry classroom,” he wrote in 2021.

“Then nearly 20 years later, on January 6th, 2021, I watched terrorists attack the symbol of my country and the Democracy my parents came here to partake in decades ago. And 36 year-old me was taken back to the pain of that high school chemistry classroom,” he continued.

AS AMERICAN PRIDE HITS A 25-YEAR LOW, A NEW 9/11 EDUCATION PLATFORM URGES THE NATION TO NEVER FORGET

Michigan Democratic candidate for Senate Abdul El-Sayed speaks at The People V. The Powerful rally at the Detroit Opera House on July 18, 2026, in Detroit, Michigan.(Sarah Rice/Getty Images)

He went on to say that Trump “recruited, radicalized and reassured” the Jan. 6 rioters in the same way bin Laden “recruited, radicalized and reassured” the “nineteen hijackers who attacked our country on 9/11.”

He also described Trump’s conduct as “terrorism,” arguing that lawmakers had both a constitutional and “moral” obligation to convict him and bar him from seeking office again.

“So, yes, Donald Trump deserved his impeachment just like he deserves to be convicted and removed from the right to ever run for office again. Of course. Every single member of Congress who believes in an America true to the ideals we claim for her has a constitutional—a moral—obligation to hold Donald Trump accountable for his terrorism,” El-Sayed wrote.

On May 1, 2011, a team of U.S. Navy SEALs shot and killed bin Laden during an early morning raid in Pakistan.

“Holding Osama bin Laden accountable is something we got right,” El-Sayed wrote in his blog post. “It sent a message—attacking our country comes at a cost.”

Campaign spokeswoman Roxie Richner pushed back on any suggestion that El-Sayed was calling for Trump to face the death penalty over Jan. 6, saying he was advocating legal accountability.

“That’s an absurd and false interpretation of what he said,” Richner told Fox News Digital. “Abdul believes no one is above the law and that includes the president.”

“As Abdul said: He believes that if anyone attacks American democracy, they must be held accountable,” Richner said.

El-Sayed’s past statements and current associations came under a microscope during his contentious primary battle with Rep. Haley Stevens. For instance, he drew considerable backlash for campaigning with streamer Hasan Piker, who once said that “America deserved 9/11.”

El-Sayed has disavowed Piker’s notorious remark, but he has declined to renounce Piker himself, framing pressure to do so as “cancel culture.” With El-Sayed now the Democratic nominee, Republicans are seizing on his controversies in attack ads as GOP-aligned groups pour millions into the Michigan Senate race.

ABDUL EL-SAYED SAYS RALLYING WITH HASAN PIKER DOESN’T MEAN HE ENDORSES ‘AMERICA DESERVED 9/11’ REMARK

Hasan Piker, left, listens as Abdul El-Sayed, a Democratic progressive candidate running for U.S. Senate in Michigan, speaks in a green room before a campaign rally, Tuesday, April 7, 2026, at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, Mich.(Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP Photo)

Referring to Trump and Jan. 6, El-Sayed stated that “we have to send the same message we did after 9/11: If you attack our democracy, we will hold you accountable.”

El-Sayed also accused lawmakers who opposed conviction of engaging in “hypocrisy rooted in racism” and said Trump and those who helped him deserved to be held accountable “for their crimes to the fullest extent of the law.”

UNEARTHED INTERVIEW REVEALS EL-SAYED’S SHARIA ‘OBLIGATION’

Abdul El-Sayed, candidate for U.S. Senate in Michigan, speaks before U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., takes the stage at Mumford High School on May 3, 2026, in Detroit, Michigan.(Sarah Rice/Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Critics have accused El-Sayed of attempting to mislead voters by scrubbing large quantities of his content off the internet before launching his 2026 Senate bid, including YouTube videos where he floated replacing the Second Amendment and railed against 4th of July fireworks.

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6392749294112

How consumers can get a refund for Trump tariffs struck down by Supreme Court

2026-08-14 2:47 PM EDT / CBS News

By Megan Cerullo Reporter, MoneyWatch

Refunds for illegal U.S. tariffs are starting to flow to businesses, and consumers could get a cut from companies that have vowed to share that financial relief with customers.

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency can only issue tariff refunds to the so-called importer of record — the entity that directly paid one of the emergency tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court earlier this year. But businesses that receive refunds for International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, tariffs can choose to keep them in their entirety or pass along some of the money to consumers.

To date, the U.S. government has refunded more than $100 billion in IEEPA tariffs to businesses, or about 60% of what it owes importers, according to a court filing earlier this month.

“There’s no way for consumers to get money from customs,” Rathna Sharad, CEO of FlavorCloud, an international logistics company that handles customs paperwork for retailers, told CBS News. “If they get them at all, it’s directly from carriers who decide to send them refunds.”

Although importers aren’t legally obligated to refund customers, some businesses have pledged to do so when the tariff cost can be differentiated from an item’s total price. UPS, FedEx and DHL have each committed to send refunds to customers on a rolling basis as the U.S. government repays the delivery companies for IEEPA tariffs and have set up refund portals for customers.

Other corporations have been more opaque about issuing rebates to shoppers. For example, Amazon Chief Financial Officer Brian Olsavsky said on an analyst call that the online retailer has “identified a limited set of circumstances where we can trace that we pass specific import charges on to customers.”

In those cases, Amazon “will proactively contact affected customers and automatically issue refunds to them,” he added.

How can I get a tariff refund?

If you paid tariffs on an online purchase shipped via UPS, FedEx or DHL, you can visit the shippers’ websites for refund information.

On its refund portal, UPS said it is passing the company’s refund claims on to consumers as it receives money from the federal government. In April, UPS said it expects to receive $5 billion in tariff refunds. The shipper has not indicated that customers must take any action, such as file a claim, to be eligible for reimbursement.

In the first phase, UPS applied for $500 million in refunds and said customers’ refunds should arrive within one to three months after it receives reimbursement from the Treasury.

FedEx has said it is issuing $800 million in refunds to customers billed for the IEEPA duties. “If refunds are issued to FedEx, we will issue refunds to the shippers and consumers who originally bore those charges,” FedEx said in a statement earlier this year.

The delivery giant also has a portal where consumers can track the status of refunds. Consumers who placed an online order with a retailer can enter the shipment’s tracking info on FedEx’s site. FedEx will indicate whether it has received a refund from CBP for the shipment or is still awaiting payment.

FedEx said that if it has received a tariff refund from CBP, its portal will show customers the refund amount (including interest) and when FedEx received the money. Consumers can enter up to 100 shipping tracking or entry numbers at a time.

For example, the image below shows that FedEx has not yet been reimbursed for a tariff on a customer’s shipment, as indicated by the “Refund Not Yet Received from CBP” label.

A screenshot showing that the federal government has not yet reimbursed FedEx for the IEEPA tariff tied to a customer’s shipment. Screenshot/FedEx.com

DHL also said it is issuing refunds to consumers as it receives government refunds. The company has not created a dedicated refund portal.

That process is automatic, according to DHL. Once CBP refunds its eligible claims, DHL will return those funds to the party that originally paid the duties, the company said on its website.

When customers don’t have a claim

Although some consumers will get back the money they paid due to stepped-up U.S. tariffs, they are likely to recoup only a small share of the roughly $1,000 households paid in additional import duties, according to the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan group focused on tax issues.

Many retailers that imported goods from overseas paid the tariffs but shifted the burden onto consumers by spreading price hikes across a range of products.

Some businesses have pledged to use their tariff refunds to lower prices, but that may not benefit consumers, especially if they’re not repeat customers, experts noted.

“Consumers are very sensitive to the price of the good, and other things that happen years later, they may not see as much,” Eric Johnson, a Columbia Business School professor focused on consumer behavior and marketing, told CBS News. “Getting a refund check is very different from other people not paying increased prices because of tariffs.”

Shoppers who purchased those higher-priced goods agreed to the price without expecting a rebate later. Shoppers shouldn’t expect refunds in such cases, according to Foley & Lardner trade attorney Greg Husisian.

“Because they were told at the time, ‘This is how much the good costs, do you want it or not?’ they don’t have a claim,” he told CBS News.

Other shippers, mostly smaller businesses, mailed imported goods to consumers and left shippers like UPS, FedEx, and DHL to pay the tariff, which they passed on to shoppers. In principle, that allows carriers to refund consumers directly.

Can I sue and get money back?

Consumers have filed numerous class-action lawsuits to recover tariff costs from Amazon, Costco, Nike, Walmart and other U.S. retailers, arguing that these businesses are now receiving a windfall from the government after dumping those costs on customers.

Yet those lawsuits are in their early stages, rest on shaky legal ground and may not succeed, according to trade attorneys.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat from Massachusetts, is also investigating seven major U.S. retailers, seeking information about the size of the tariff refunds they’re receiving and pressing firms to return the money they recoup directly to consumers.

Edited by Alain Sherter

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Susan Collins drops brutal reminder of Dem rival rocked by accusations

August 14, 2026 12:06pm EDT / Fox News

A Fox News poll showed Jackson holding a slight two-point edge over Collins in the race that could decide Senate majority

By Paul Steinhauser

GOP Sen. Susan Collins of Maine told Fox News Digital her Democratic challenger Troy Jackson apparently “struggles to control his temper” in Kittery, Maine, on Aug. 14, 2026.

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

blob:https://www.foxnews.com/bc84c617-ae13-417a-8a94-27f922ab079a

Listen to this article

7 min

KITTERY, Maine – Republican Sen. Susan Collins says her Democratic challenger in Maine’s high-stakes U.S. Senate race apparently “struggles to control his temper.”

Collins broke her silence about Democratic Senate nominee Troy Jackson on Friday after a newly resurfaced 1988 police record detailed accusations that Jackson assaulted a man and pushed his longtime partner during a late-night confrontation in Fort Kent, Maine.

Jackson, a one-time logger and a former state Senate president, was chosen a couple of weeks ago by Maine Democrats to replace embattled oysterman Graham Platner, who won the June Democratic Senate nomination in a landslide before imploding and dropping out of the race last month amid rape allegations that he denied.

WHAT THE NEW FOX NEWS POLL IN MAINE’S CRUCIAL SENATE RACE SHOWS

Maine Democrats picked progressive former state lawmaker Troy Jackson as their new Senate nominee, giving them another shot at the crucial race after previous pick Graham Platner dropped out.(Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Jackson is challenging Collins in a crucial race that’s among a dozen that will determine if the GOP holds onto its slim Senate majority.

Asked by Fox News Digital about recent reports regarding Jackson, Collins said, “He’s the one that needs to respond to the reports. I’m not going to comment on them. But I will say that, based on widespread reporting, it appears that he struggles to control his temper.”

Collins spoke with reporters after kicking off a statewide bus tour on Friday in Kittery, Maine. The longtime senator is the only GOP incumbent running for re-election in a state President Donald Trump lost in the 2024 election. A Fox News poll in Maine released on Wednesday indicated Jackson holding a slight two-point edge over Collins, which was within the survey’s sampling error.

RESURFACED ASSAULT REPORT PUTS DEM SENATE NOMINEE IN GOP CROSSHAIRS: ‘GRAHAM PLATNER 2.0’

Republican Sen. Susan Collins speaks with a Maine voter as the longtime GOP senator kicks off a statewide bus tour on Friday, August 14, 2026, in Kittery, Maine.(Paul Steinhauser/Fox News)

The Bangor Daily News reported this week that the police report accused Jackson of assaulting another man during a late-night brawl on March 12, 1988.

INTERNET ERUPTS OVER REPORT THAT PLATNER’S REPLACEMENT IN KEY SENATE RACE FATHERED CHILDREN WITH SECOND COUSIN

The brawl was over Jackson’s longtime partner Lana Pelletier, who, according to records, is also his second cousin. Jackson and Pelletier share two adult children.

The police report indicates that Pelletier told officers at the time that Jackson “pushed her around,” a statement she now denies making.

According to the report, the then-19-year-old Jackson went to a home in Fort Kent, Maine, around 2 a.m.

After the occupant of the house told Jackson to go away, the report says the future state lawmaker “kicked the door in” and grabbed his rival by the throat before punching him in the face, causing the victim’s glasses to leave a cut. The report added that a friend broke up the ensuing fight.

‘F—ING IDIOTS’: TOP FEMALE OPERATIVES TORCH PLATNER ENABLERS AS RAPE ALLEGATION ROCKS DEM CAMPAIGN

“Troy Jackson is Graham Platner 2.0: Violent and unhinged,” the Republican National Committee charged in a social media post after the initial report went viral.

DEMOCRATS STAND BY JACKSON AFTER LATEST CONTROVERSY

Democratic Senate nominee in Maine Graham Platner and his wife speak with supporters following his primary night victory speech, in Blue Hill, Maine on June 9, 2026.(Paul Steinhauser/Fox News Digital)

Meanwhile, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, referring to Senate Democratic Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee chair Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, wrote on X, “Is this incredibly disturbing report of violence and abuse not enough for you to drop Troy Jackson?”

Jackson said in a statement obtained by Fox News Digital, “Nearly forty years ago, when I was 19 years old, I got into a fight with another man. I took responsibility for it then, and I take responsibility for it now.”

“But let me be clear: I have never been violent with my partner Lana, or any other woman. This happened nearly four decades ago, and I assure Mainers this incident in no way reflects the man I am today or the life I’ve led in the years since,” the Democratic Senate nominee added.

FORMER PLATNER ALLY TROY JACKSON LOCKS DOWN DELEGATES AS TOP RIVALS FOR DEMOCRATIC SENATE NOMINATION DROP OUT

Pelletier told Fox News Digital in a statement, “I do not remember making the statements attributed to me and they are not accurate. This is the first time I have seen this report from 40 years ago. Troy and I have built a life and family together and I know the person he has been through the decades since, both as a caring partner and father.”

WHO’S UP AND WHO’S DOWN: CHECK OUT THE FOX NEWS POWER RANKINGS ON THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS

Troy Jackson, the Democratic Senate nominee in Maine, is seen at a campaign event during his earlier gubernatorial bid, on May 20, 2026, in Portland, Maine.(Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

“I understand Maine voters want to learn about Troy as he seeks to represent them but personal attacks on my family are unacceptable,” she added. “In the 40 years since he made a mistake as a 19-year-old kid, Troy has grown to be a passionate advocate for Mainers and dedicated his life to making things better for our state while Susan Collins has been in Washington enriching herself at our expense.”

Meanwhile, the Jackson campaign told Fox News Digital that Troy “acknowledges going to the residence and getting into a physical confrontation with another man. The case was resolved with a $50 fine.”

On Thursday, the conservative-leaning Maine Wire reported that a man from Allagash, Maine, who says he’s known Jackson for decades alleged that he witnessed Jackson strike Pelletier in a separate incident years ago.

PLATNER ALLY TROY JACKSON CLOSING IN ON DEMOCRATIC SENATE NOD IN KEY RACE TO FACE COLLINS

Jackson, who hails from the remote northern tip of Maine, is a one-time conservative Republican who became a Democrat over two decades ago.

As he quickly became the frontrunner in the abbreviated race to replace Platner, he faced a slew of reports over his alleged temper and workplace conduct, as well as reported claims of mortgage improprieties and other potential liabilities, including his past strict anti-abortion stance.

DEMOCRACY ’26: STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FOX NEWS ELECTION HUB

Asked by Fox News Digital last month about any vetting concerns, Jackson said, “I think a lot of this obviously is Sen. Collins trying to make sure she can win the election on a really bad record. But, for me, I’ve been in the legislature for 20 years. I do believe I’ve been vetted, I’ve been tested. People know exactly what I’m fighting for. I have their back. And they know they can trust me.”

The scrutiny and negative reports are raising concerns by some in the party that Democrats landed another unvetted nominee after the Platner implosion.

INSIDE THE SLAPDASH PLATNER VETTING JOB THAT IGNORED WARNINGS BEFORE BID BLEW UP: SOURCE

“This is a bit of a rocket vetting process,” a Democratic strategist who works on Senate races who asked to remain anonymous to speak more freely, told Fox News Digital. “Maine Democrats have made their choice, and they’re just going to have to ride with it.”

Asked about the Democrats’ vetting of Jackson, Collins told reporters on Friday, “From my perspective, it seems that vetting is very important. We learned the failure of vetting with Graham Platner. But that’s really up to the Democrats.”

The NRSC, in a series of social media posts directed at Democratic senators and Senate nominees who have endorsed Jackson since he landed the nomination, asked if those politicians will “call on Troy Jackson to drop out?”

SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER

Then-Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner and then-gubernatorial candidate Troy Jackson stand together during a “Fighting Oligarchy” tour stop at the Collins Center for the Arts on the University of Maine campus in Orono, Maine, on May 24, 2026.(Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Jackson, who unsuccessfully ran for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination, campaigned alongside Platner during the primary. And he quickly made the case that he was the best equipped candidate to grab the mantle of the progressive and populist movement that had backed Platner.

FOX NEWS POLL: NEW MATCHUP, SAME RESULT: MAINE SENATE RACE STAYS LOCKED

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Similar to Platner, Jackson is running on a platform aimed at working-class voters. He backs raising taxes on billionaires, the universal healthcare system known as “Medicare-for-all,” and abolishing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). He also opposes military aid to Israel as Democrats are increasingly divided over support for America’s longtime Middle East ally.

Paul Steinhauser covers the national campaign trail from coast to coast for Fox News

FDA upgrades egg recall linked to salmonella to highest health risk level

August 14, 2026 3:57 PM EDT / CBS News MoneyWatch

By Megan Cerullo Reporter, MoneyWatch
Megan Cerullo is a New York-based reporter for CBS MoneyWatch covering small business, workplace, health care, consumer spending and personal finance topics. She regularly appears on CBS News 24/7 to discuss her reporting.

Read Full Bio

The Food and Drug Administration this week escalated a recall of 1.6 million cartons of eggs over potential salmonella contamination to its most serious classification.

On Wednesday, the FDA designated the incident a “Class 1” recall, which the agency applies to product recalls “in which there is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to a violative product will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.”

The eggs were first recalled on July 22 by North Manchester, Indiana-based Midwest Poultry Services because they could be contaminated with salmonella. The eggs were sold under various brand names at retailers across the U.S.

Salmonella, a bacterial infection that can cause diarrhea, fever and stomach pain, usually spreads to people through food. Typically, symptoms resolve on their own, but some infected individuals can become severely dehydrated and require medical attention. The condition can also be life-threatening if the infection spreads beyond a person’s intestines, according to the Mayo Clinic.

Midwest Poultry Services recalled more than 19 million eggs from Texas farms between June 6 and July 3. The recalled products have “Sell By” or “Best By” dates between July 20 and August 17.

Here’s where the recalled eggs were sold (See a complete list of the recalled products.)

• Arkansas: Brookshire Grocery stores
• Louisiana: Kroger, Brookshire Grocery stores
• Mississippi: Brookshire Grocery stores
• New Mexico: Brookshire Grocery stores
• Oklahoma: Brookshire Grocery stores
• Texas: Kroger, Brookshire Grocery stores

The eggs were also sold at other smaller retail outlets, according to the FDA, which said that no other products for the poultry firm are part of the latest recall.

After a salmonella outbreak began earlier this summer, Taylor Farms recalled various prepared products made with jalapeños that were sold at retailers including Target, Trader Joe’s, Walmart and Whole Foods.

Salinas, California-based Taylor Farms said it voluntarily recalled the foods after a pepper supplier, Coast Citrus Distributors, recalled its fresh jalapeños due to salmonella concerns.

Edited by Alain Sherter

https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/video/midway-poultry-services-recalls-millions-of-eggs-over-salmonella-risk/

Does Mangione’s guilty plea in federal case jeopardize his state murder trial?

2026-08-14T13:49:00-0400 / CBS News

By Mark Osborne

Updated on: August 14, 2026 / 2:56 PM EDT / CBS News

Luigi Mangione’s guilty plea on Friday in the federal case tied to the shooting death of a healthcare executive nearly two years ago is now generating questions about what will happen with his state murder trial, scheduled to get underway in just three weeks.

Mangione admitted Friday to killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in December 2024. He pleaded guilty to federal charges of interstate stalking resulting in death and stalking through use of interstate facilities resulting in death. Both carry a maximum potential sentence of life in prison, which Mangione acknowledged in court he understood.

The judge scheduled sentencing for Dec. 18.

Meanwhile, Mangione is also facing state charges of second-degree murder and weapons and forgery charges. A first-degree murder charge was tossed out in September 2025.

His lawyers, led by high-profile attorney Karen Friedman Agnifilo, have repeatedly argued the state trial amounted to double jeopardy. It’s a claim they will likely pursue even more aggressively now that he’s pleaded to the federal charges.

“Despite this being a single, isolated event, Mr. Mangione has been unfairly treated since the outset in every way and has successfully fought off terrorism charges and the death penalty, while also fighting at the same time two simultaneous prosecutions in two jurisdictions who are trying to punish him twice for the exact conduct,” Agnifilo told reporters outside court after the plea hearing.

Agnifilo said they have filed in state court to dismiss those charges based on the double jeopardy claim.

Here are some of the biggest questions remaining in the wake of Mangione’s plea deal.

What is double jeopardy and how would it apply to Luigi Mangione?

Double jeopardy is a clause in the Fifth Amendment that says individuals cannot be prosecuted twice for the same crime.

All of Mangione’s crimes in New York — he is also facing weapons charges in Pennsylvania, where he was arrested — stem from the shooting of Thompson, a father of two who was gunned down on a Manhattan sidewalk as he headed to a company investors conference. The specific state charges, however, are different.

Luigi Mangione talks to one of his lawyers in Manhattan Supreme Court on Aug. 11, 2026. Barry Williams/Pool via REUTERS

“New York law does not permit a person to be prosecuted and punished twice for the exact same crime under a statute that covers successive prosecutions, it’s also known as the double jeopardy law,” Agnifilo said.

But a spokesperson for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who is prosecuting the state case, said his office plans to continue its work and fight any challenges in court.

“Since December 2024, the Manhattan D.A.’s Office has been tirelessly preparing to pursue a trial conviction in New York State Supreme Court for the alleged cold-blooded murder of Brian Thompson,” the spokesperson said in a statement. “We are encouraged that Mr. Thompson’s family received a measure of accountability today. While federal sentencing is pending, we are prepared to litigate the defense motions. The Manhattan D.A.’s Office remains committed to seeking justice for Mr. Thompson and his family.”

Regardless of what is eventually decided in the courts, it seems likely the state trial will be delayed.

“It is significant to note that since the beginning, there has been this jockeying between the state and federal prosecutors, first, about who would go first at trial,” said CBS News legal reporter Katrina Kaufman. “Federal prosecutors tried to go first, but the state judge said emphatically that he felt New York did all the work here.”

Is double jeopardy different in New York?

The fact that the case took place in New York does change the equation. New York has a state law that is more generous to defendants than the Fifth Amendment double jeopardy clause, according to Jessica Levinson, a CBS News contributor and professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.

The New York state law says you can’t have successive prosecutions for the same course of conduct and the same acts, Levinson said.

“The defense is going to argue that the federal stalking charges and the state murder charges are based on the same set of conduct and the same set of facts,” Levinson said. “The prosecution is going to say, ‘But wait, there’s a carve-out in state law.’ And those exceptions deal with situations where the elements of the crimes, the elements of federal stalking versus the elements of the state murder charge, are substantially different.”

Agnifilo confirmed Mangione’s legal team would pursue the double jeopardy argument in talking to reporters after Friday’s hearing.

“He’s been treated differently from every other defendant charged with this offense in New York,” she said. “However, thankfully, New York law does not allow this.”

Luigi Mangione’s attorneys (L-R) Jacob Kaplan, Marc Agnifilo and Karen Friedman Agnifilo depart federal court in Manhattan after Mangione pleaded guilty to the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, Aug. 14, 2026. Timothy A. Clary/AFP via Getty Images

Does double jeopardy apply to Luigi Mangione’s case?

It will be up to New York State Supreme Court Justice Gregory Carro, who is presiding over the state case, to decide whether New York’s double jeopardy clause applies to Mangione’s state trial.

Mangione’s defense team said it has already moved to make that argument in a court filing.

“Today’s guilty plea triggers the double jeopardy statute, and we just filed our motion in state court explaining why the state charges must be dismissed under New York’s double jeopardy protections,” Agnifilo said Friday.

In addition, it will have to be decided if Mangione’s admission to killing Thompson in open court Friday could be introduced in the state trial, Levinson said.

“I think what the defense believed they could get in exchange for this guilty plea is potentially two things,” Levinson said. “One of them being accepting responsibility and hoping that serves as a mitigating factor when the judge does give a sentence. The other … is the hope that in deciding to say, ‘I’m pleading guilty,’ that includes a prosecution in the legal sense.”

“What he’s hoping is that under New York law, which prohibits successive prosecutions, that means that a judge will dismiss the murder charge against him,” Levinson continued. “I think that’s a difficult argument for him to make.”

Joe Tamburino, an attorney and legal analyst, told CBS News he agreed Mangione’s federal plea should not exclude a state trial.

“New York’s law is trying to prevent intentional murders, whereas the federal government is trying to prevent stalking or crossing state lines to stalk a victim, and the victim dies. So we have two different types of charges with different elements,” Tamburino said. “And those charges are designed to prevent different types of harm. So I don’t think double jeopardy would prevent New York state from continuing with their prosecution.”

Thompson’s family, in a statement after the guilty plea, seemed to indicate they wish to see a state trial.

“We remain mindful that additional proceedings in New York and Pennsylvania are still to come, and we will continue to seek the justice Brian deserves,” they said.

Idaho must allow abortions to preserve women’s health, US judge rules

2026-08-14T17:49:20.712Z / Reuters

Placards in support of abortion rights lie on the ground on the day the Supreme Court justices hear oral arguments over the legality of Idaho’s Republican-backed, near-total abortion ban in medical-emergency situations, at the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, U.S., April 24, 2024. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

• Summary

• Idaho law allows life-saving abortions
• Constitution protects abortions over health risks, judge says
• First ruling of its kind since Roe v. Wade overturned

Aug 14 (Reuters) – A U.S. judge has ruled that Idaho’s near-total abortion ban is unconstitutional because it provides exceptions when abortions are ​life-saving and not for broader risks to pregnant women’s health.

U.S. District Judge Lynn Winmill in Boise said ‌in

an 81-page ruling, opens new tab
issued late on Thursday that the right to a health-preserving abortion is protected by the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees due process and equal protection under the law.

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

The ruling is the first by a federal judge to recognize a constitutional right to abortion in ​certain circumstances since the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that had legalized abortion nationwide, ​according to lawyers for the Idaho doctor who sued over the state laws.

LEGAL CHALLENGES TO STATE ⁠RESTRICTIONS

Idaho and a dozen other states have banned virtually all abortions since the Supreme Court ruling, and several other states severely ​restrict them, prompting a series of pending legal challenges. The Supreme Court in 2024 reinstated a decision requiring Idaho to allow abortions when women ​are having medical emergencies, but did not weigh in on the merits of the case.

Winmill blocked enforcement of two Idaho laws to the extent that they prohibit doctors from providing abortion care to patients with serious medical conditions, including mental health conditions that can raise the risk of self-harm and ​suicide.

“A pregnant woman’s health is not a state resource to be allocated at the legislature’s whim,” wrote Winmill, an appointee of Democratic ​former President Bill Clinton.

Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador, a Republican, said his office would appeal and was confident the decision would be overturned.

“Judge Winmill … ‌legislated from ⁠the bench and manufactured a new constitutional right to abortion,” Labrador said in a statement.

Plaintiff Stacy Seyb, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist, is represented by abortion rights groups Legal Voice and the Lawyering Project, which welcomed the decision in a statement.

“This ruling reduces the risk that pregnant people in Idaho will die or suffer serious injury from preventable causes,” said Stephanie Toti, the Lawyering Project’s executive ​director.

The Idaho Family Policy Center, a ​conservative Christian group that opposes ⁠abortion and is not involved in the case, said Idaho’s abortion ban broadly remains in effect, including a provision allowing relatives of an aborted fetus to sue abortion providers.

“Any physician who performs ​an abortion that is prohibited by (Idaho) law can still be liable for breaking the law,” Blaine ​Conzatti, the group’s ⁠president, said in a statement.

Winmill declined to block a ban on abortion when a fetus has a life-limiting condition, unless the condition poses a serious threat to the mother’s health. He said that while “some may find the law cruel,” the Constitution gave state lawmakers the discretion to ⁠adopt it.

But ​the judge said states have for centuries recognized that abortions can be necessary ​to prevent serious and lasting harm.

“By prohibiting women from obtaining essential medical care when pregnancy poses a severe danger, Idaho contradicts this long tradition and the underlying ​right to defend oneself from harm,” he wrote.

Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Rod Nickel

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

Dan Wiessner (@danwiessner) reports on labor and employment and immigration law, including litigation and policy making. He can be reached at daniel.wiessner@thomsonreuters.com.

Trump’s Kennedy Center and ballroom fixations are political malpractice for the GOP

2026-08-14T16:48:49.939Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/08/14/politics/trump-kennedy-center-ballroom

Republicans are facing a potentially ugly 2026 midterm election in less than three months. And nobody seems to be able — or perhaps even cares to try — to prevail upon President Donald Trump to mitigate the damage.

Two recent developments are a case in point.

On Friday, Trump appealed to the Supreme Court to be able to continue building his coveted ballroom — which Americans already don’t like. And the day before, the president and his handpicked board at the Kennedy Center tried to put Trump’s name on the building – again.

Both moves suggest Trump remains preoccupied with his self-gratification and glorification, even though it’s increasingly likely to come at the expense of his party.

After a federal judge rejected the previous attempt to rebrand the center as the “Trump Kennedy Center” — forcing the administration to remove Trump’s name from the building’s façade — the board is now attempting a workaround.

It voted Thursday to add an inscription below the Kennedy Center’s sign that says the complex was “Restored and Renovated by President Donald J. Trump.” It also voted to rename the area around the center the “President Donald J. Trump Plaza,” according to Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty, an ex-officio trustee of the board who sued over the initial attempt to add Trump’s name to the performing arts center.

(The board is also attempting to close the center for renovations again, after their previous effort was also rejected.)

It remains to be seen whether the moves will pass legal muster.

The federal judge who previously ruled against the administration said that federal law “makes crystal clear” that the center “cannot bear any other formal name or public memorial based on the Board’s unilateral say-so.”

As CNN’s Sunlen Serfaty notes, the law allows an “inscription on the marble walls in the north or south galleries, the Hall of States, or the Hall of Nations acknowledging a major contribution.”

But even if it turns out this is legal, that doesn’t make it politically wise. And it epitomizes the political malpractice coming from the administration right now.

Just consider the full scope of what’s happening: With just 81 days until a 2026 election in which Republicans seem to be in trouble, the administration is working to slap the name of a living, incumbent president with record-low approval numbers on a prominent cultural institution — for the second time. And crucially, it’s doing so even as Americans overwhelmingly say such efforts have gone too far, that Trump and his administration are focused on the wrong things and that he is too preoccupied with his personal gain.

It’s as if the administration is trying to cement those ill perceptions.

A CNN poll last month found that 59% of Americans said Trump had “gone too far” in “making changes to cultural institutions such as the Kennedy Center and the Smithsonian.”

Even 32% of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents — i.e. Trump’s base — said he had “gone too far” on this.

Also, a Pew Research Center poll in April found just 9% of Americans said it was acceptable to name government buildings after Trump while he is still in office. (Indeed, it’s virtually unheard-of to do this for an incumbent president.)

About eight times as many said either that it was not acceptable to name government buildings after Trump at all (50%), or that it would be acceptable but only after Trump’s presidency is over (21%).

And only 17% of Republicans said it was acceptable to put Trump’s name on government buildings during his presidency, as he’s now attempting to do yet again.

Which brings us to the “but.” Maybe voters don’t really care that much? Maybe the Kennedy Center isn’t as important to some of them as it might be to you (the person who chose to read this analysis about it)? Maybe people think this is silly and bad, but that Trump’s name will just be pulled off when he’s no longer president?

Possibly. But the situation also risks reinforcing a troubling election narrative for Trump and the GOP, which is that the president is way too focused on himself and not the things that are important to voters.

CBS News polling has shown nearly 8 in 10 Americans said the Trump administration has focused “not enough” on lowering prices.

And the CNN poll mentioned above showed 73% said Trump “hasn’t paid enough attention to the country’s most important problems.” That number has steadily risen about 20 points over the course of Trump’s second term.

What do Americans think he is focused on, then? Well, himself.

The CNN poll also showed 66% of Americans said Trump did not put the good of the country above his own personal gain; 76% of independents and 30% of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents subscribed to this view.

Focusing on the Kennedy Center — and things like the ballroom, which also appears quite unpopular — in the run-up to the election would seem to be solid evidence that Trump’s priorities remain misplaced.

Americans might not care about Trump’s pet projects as much as, say, the Iran war and the high gas prices it has caused. And those issues surely remain much bigger liabilities for Trump and the GOP, particularly if the president can’t end the war by November 3.

But his obsession with slapping his name on things instead of lowering prices contributes to that narrative, too.

This story has been updated with additional information.

Trump says USS Lincoln’s deployment was ‘not nearly long enough’

2026-08-14 1:53 PM ET / CNN

By Kevin Liptak

Updated Aug 14, 2026, 2:11 PM ET

PUBLISHED Aug 14, 2026, 1:53 PM ET

An F/A-18E Super Hornet, assigned to Strike Fighter Squadron 151, launches from the flight deck of Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln during the ongoing conflict with Iran, on July 31.

US Navy/Reuters

President Donald Trump on Friday dismissed claims that families of service members aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln have concerns about conditions aboard the aircraft carrier, which has been deployed for nearly nine months supporting operations in the Middle East.

Instead, Trump claimed the ship’s lengthy deployment had in fact not been long enough.

“No, they’re not,” Trump said when asked by reporters at Joint Base Andrews about relatives of those aboard the ship expressing worry about mental health and living conditions for their relatives.

He said the Lincoln was moving out of the region soon, and would be replaced by “another, very similar, ship.”

But asked whether the Lincoln’s eight-and-a-half months at sea was too long, Trump claimed the opposite was true.

“No, no, no. Not nearly long enough,” he said before turning abruptly to board Air Force One.

Several Democratic lawmakers are calling for answers after concerns were raised by families of sailors aboard the Lincoln about the deteriorating living conditions and worsening mental health during the ship’s record-breaking deployment.

Since the Lincoln left its home port of San Diego last November, the aircraft carrier has been deployed for more than 250 days after being redirected to the Middle East to support US operations in the war with Iran, now entering its sixth month. With roughly 5,000 sailors and Marines aboard, it has not made a port call in more than 200 days, setting a modern-day record for consecutive days at sea, according to Sen. Richard Blumenthal.

The USS George Washington carrier group, which finished a port visit in Vietnam on August 5, is currently headed to the Middle East to replace the Lincoln, a US official told CNN on Thursday. The official said that the swap had been previously planned. It was not immediately clear when the Washington would arrive.

On Thursday, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said that conditions on the Lincoln had been “completely misrepresented” while talking to reporters on a trip to Central America, though he did not specify his concerns with the reporting.

“We make sure every ship, every crew, every captain has everything we can provide them at every single moment,” he said. “Some deployments are longer than others, and ⁠I have more respect and gratitude for those sailors than anybody. What they do in those high seas in those austere conditions with less port calls — it’s incredible.”

Justice Department expands military’s power to detain migrants accused of trespassing

2026-08-14T12:48:00-0400 / CBS News

By Camilo Montoya-Galvez Immigration Correspondent
Camilo Montoya-Galvez is the Immigration Correspondent at CBS News, where his reporting is featured across multiple programs and platforms, including national broadcast shows, CBS News 24/7, CBSNews.com and the organization’s social media accounts.

Read Full Bio

Updated on: August 14, 2026 / 12:49 PM EDT / CBS News

Add CBS News on Google

The Justice Department on Friday issued a legal opinion giving the U.S. military broader powers to detain migrants accused of trespassing in areas that the Department of Defense controls as part of President Trump’s crackdown at the southern border.

The opinion from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel concerns large swaths of land near the U.S.-Mexico border that the second Trump administration has designated as “National Defense Areas” for the purposes of deterring illegal immigration.

While the military is generally prohibited from enforcing laws on domestic soil under the longstanding Posse Comitatus Act, the zones have allowed soldiers to detain migrants accused of entering the national defense areas, which are closed to civilians. The arrangement has allowed the Justice Department to prosecute those arrested in the zones for trespassing on military land.

In its opinion Friday, the Justice Department said military personnel can arrest individuals who leave national defense areas before they can be apprehended for trespassing.

“In sum, we conclude that the use of military personnel to arrest trespassers just outside of an NDA would not violate the [Posse Comitatus Act], given the express statutory authorization and the military-purpose of a commander’s traditional protective power,” Deputy Assistant Attorney General William Hyde said in his opinion.

The Trump administration has so far set up six national defense areas along the southern border, in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas. But Friday’s opinion said the military has suggested it may designate additional zones in the future.

A map from the Government Accountability Office showing “National Defense Areas” along the U.S.-Mexico border. Government Accountability Office

Since the national defense areas encompass wide strips of land that might not appear to be part of a military base, the Defense Department in some areas has put up signs in both English and Spanish warning that the area is restricted and unauthorized entry is prohibited.

U.S. Northern Command, which oversees U.S. military forces in North America, has said on its website that military service members can apprehend those who trespass onto one of the national defense areas and transfer them to the appropriate law enforcement authorities.

The Justice Department began charging individuals who were apprehended in April 2025 and since then has charged hundreds more. The specific charges for trespassing a national defense area are most commonly violating a military security regulation and entering military, naval or Coast Guard property, both of which are misdemeanors. There can also be other charges associated with crossing the border that aren’t directly related to trespassing onto military land.

The Pentagon made the U.S.-Mexico border its first mission during the initial days of President Trump’s second term by announcing plans to ramp up U.S. forces there. Since then, the Defense Department says more than 20,000 service members have served deployments on the border.

The OLC’s legal opinion is advisory only and does not set any legal precedent.

In addition to enlisting the military’s help at the southern border, the Trump administration has virtually closed the asylum system for those entering the U.S. illegally. The crackdown has coincided with a dramatic drop in illegal crossings there.

In fiscal year 2025, Border Patrol reported fewer than 240,000 migrant apprehensions along the southern border, down from 1.5 million and 2 million in fiscal years 2024 and 2023, respectively, according to agency data. The number has fallen even more in fiscal year 2026, with Border Patrol recording 81,000 apprehensions, with two months left.

MN Senate candidate ripped for blaming Walz for fraud despite being his #2: ‘Knows she’s cooked’

The Democratic Senate nominee said ‘the governor says the buck stops with him’ when asked about her responsibility

August 14, 2026 12:29pm EDT / Fox News

Peggy Flanagan pointed to Gov. Tim Walz when pressed on her responsibility for Minnesota fraud on MS NOW’s “Morning Joe” Thursday. (Credit: MS NOW – Aug. 13)

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

Minnesota Democratic Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan pointed the finger at Gov. Tim Walz when asked during a recent interview about her responsibility for the massive fraud scandal that unfolded under their watch.

“I would say, the governor says the buck stops with him, more should have been done sooner, and I agree,” Flanagan said on MSNOW on Thursday when asked if she bears any responsibility for the scandal, which federal investigators have said could total more than $9 billion.

Flanagan, who is the Democratic nominee for Senate in Minnesota, continued, “And now we know that 100 people have been charged, 60 have been convicted.”

Flanagan’s comments sparked pushback on social media from users accusing her of deflecting responsibility given she has served alongside Walz as his second in command since 2019.

PEGGY FLANAGAN WAS MINNESOTA’S NO 2 OFFICIAL AS MASSIVE FRAUD SCANDAL EXPLODED UNDER STATE’S WATCH

Peggy Flanagan distances herself from Gov. Tim Walz over Minnesota fraud, saying more should have been done sooner on MS NOW’s “Morning Joe.”(Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)

“Minnesota Democrat Peggy Flanagan blames Tim Walz and dodges accountability for rampant fraud in her state,” the Republican National Committee (RNC) posted on X.

“She KNOWS she’s vulnerable on this,” conservative radio host and editor Larry O’Connor posted on X. “Huge opening for @Michele_Tafoya.”

Former sports broadcaster Michele Tafoya, Flanagan’s Republican opponent in November, also reacted to the clip in a post on X saying, “Peggy Flanagan refuses to take any responsibility and accountability for billions of our tax dollars being stolen under her watch as lieutenant governor.

HALL OF FAMER TONY DUNGY ENDORSES MICHELE TAFOYA IN CROWDED MINNESOTA REPUBLICAN PRIMARY FOR U.S. SENATE

Minnesota’s Democratic Senate nominee, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, is riding the progressive wave this midterm election cycle, but before handing moderates a resounding defeat, she had a front row seat in the sprawling fraud scandal in her home state.(Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)

“Minnesotans deserve better than excuses. They deserve leaders who will take responsibility and get the job done.”

Townhall columnist Dustin Grage posted on X, “Here is Peggy Flanagan blaming Tim Walz for the fraud. Oh yeah, she knows she’s cooked if she rightfully gets tied to the fraud.”

The fraud scandal in Minnesota ultimately pushed Walz to drop his bid for re-election, and critics have continued to hammer his administration for not doing enough to prevent the growing fraud problem, which had become an open secret in the state over the past few years.

Flanagan’s culpability in the fraud scandal will likely become a major talking point in her campaign for Senate as calls from conservatives for more accountability continue to pour in as no top officials have been fired or removed from office in the scandal’s aftermath.

“@peggyflanagan did NOTHING to protect vulnerable citizens & taxpayers despite countless whistleblower reports, Auditor reports, & criminal convictions,” Minnesota Republican State Rep. Kristin Robbins, who chaired the Minnesota House’s Fraud Prevention and Oversight Committee posted on X this week.

“Peggy Flanagan, @Tim_Walz & @keithellison protected their political base instead of stopping the fraud.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz testifies during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing at the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., on March 4, 2026. The committee held the hearing to examine the alleged misuse of federal funds intended for Minnesota social services and Medicaid programs.(Getty Images)

Flanagan did not mention fraud during her victory speech following Tuesday night’s Senate primary, which also drew criticism from Tafoya on social media.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Flanagan campaign for comment.

Andrew Mark Miller is a reporter at Fox News. Find him on Twitter @andymarkmiller and email tips to AndrewMark.Miller@Fox.com.