博客

Trump administration takes mail-in ballot fight to US Supreme Court

2026-09-03T20:24:38.886Z / Reuters

By Andrew Chung

September 3, 2026 8:24 PM UTC Updated 1 hour ago

A mail-in ballot, during the Pennsylvania primary election, is displayed in this illustration picture taken in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S., May 19, 2026. REUTERS/Hannah Beier/Illustration

• Postal service rule implements Trump’s mail-in ballot order
• Judge had temporarily blocked USPS mail-ballot rule
• Filing says rule prevents voter fraud, but such evidence is rare

Sept 3 (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s administration asked the Supreme Court on Thursday to ​let it enforce a new U.S. Postal Service rule tightening the use of mail-in ballots, moving swiftly after ‌a judge temporarily blocked the regulation ahead of November’s midterm elections.

In an emergency request, the Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to lift Boston-based U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani’s order temporarily preventing the USPS from enforcing the new rule, which it adopted following an executive order by the Republican president to ​restrict mail-in ballots.

The Reuters Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

The USPS regulation would impose new voter-specific data and ballot envelope standards, and potentially refuse the delivery of ​ballots that do not comply, which critics say could disrupt thousands of legitimate votes as the November ⁠3 vote approaches.

Republicans are locked in a tight battle to retain control of Congress in the election. Critics say restricting mail-in ballots ​would stand to disproportionately benefit Republicans given that Democratic voters traditionally have been more likely to use mail-in ballots.

It is the second ​time that the administration has turned to the Supreme Court as it defends Trump’s directive against legal challenges by states and voting rights groups. On August 24 the court lifted an earlier injunction imposed by Talwani in June blocking Trump’s order.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

That decision, powered by the court’s 6-3 conservative majority, faulted a coalition ​of mostly Democratic-governed states for suing too soon, but left the door open to another challenge. The court’s three liberal justices ​dissented.

RULE WOULD TIGHTEN STANDARDS FOR MAIL BALLOT DELIVERY

Under the new USPS rule, states must provide lists, opens new tab of mail ballot recipients to the postal service and use ‌agency-approved ⁠outbound and return ballot mail envelopes outfitted with unique barcodes. The postal service could then refuse to send out ballots that do not comply with the new standards or are associated with voters who do not appear on the lists.

Trump, who signed his executive order targeting mail-in ballots in March, has for years cast doubt on their security, although evidence of voter fraud is rare. Trump has ​made false claims of widespread fraud ​in U.S. elections including his ⁠2020 loss to former Democratic President Joe Biden.

blob:https://www.reuters.com/71744c45-b130-4b2d-a748-4b0e377b60bd
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-administration-takes-mail-in-ballot-fight-us-supreme-court-2026-09-03/
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-administration-takes-mail-in-ballot-fight-us-supreme-court-2026-09-03/
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-administration-takes-mail-in-ballot-fight-us-supreme-court-2026-09-03/
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-administration-takes-mail-in-ballot-fight-us-supreme-court-2026-09-03/
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-administration-takes-mail-in-ballot-fight-us-supreme-court-2026-09-03/
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-administration-takes-mail-in-ballot-fight-us-supreme-court-2026-09-03/
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-administration-takes-mail-in-ballot-fight-us-supreme-court-2026-09-03/

The administration in its written filing on Thursday urged the Supreme Court to allow it to implement an “important federal policy to protect the mails from being ​used to commit voter fraud.”

A coalition of mostly Democratic-governed states and Washington, D.C., as well as ​a number of ⁠voting rights groups, challenged the new USPS rule.

Talwani issued a temporary order on August 27 blocking the rule for 14 days, finding that it likely violates the U.S. Constitution, under which the states administer elections, and would be impossible for the states to comply with given the ⁠rapidly approaching ​midterms.

The Justice Department asked the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to ​put the judge’s order on hold, but did not wait for a decision before turning to the Supreme Court.

Talwani also held a hearing on Thursday to consider whether ​to issue a longer-term injunction.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Howard Goller

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

House Oversight Committee weighs holding billionaire Leon Black in contempt of Congress

2026-09-03 07:15 PM EDT / CNN Politics

House Oversight Committee weighs holding billionaire Leon Black in contempt of Congress

The Lead

Rep. James Walkinshaw joins The Lead.

0:57 • Source: CNN

Smithsonian showdown intensifies as Trump administration issues a stark new warning

DOI and White House letter claims evidence of federal antidiscrimination law violations but does not detail specifics

September 3, 2026 4:34pm EDT / Fox News

By Robert Schmad Fox News

Laura: Traditional approaches to history have been jettisoned in favor of ‘restorative history’

Fox News host Laura Ingraham accuses the Smithsonian of promoting a divisive ‘activist agenda’ and ‘restorative history’ that negatively frames America. She highlights National Museum of American History director Anthea Hartig’s testimony regarding the museum’s educational materials and controversial exhibits, including an alleged ‘fetish attire’ display and the exclusion of pro-life history. Ingraham questions the use of taxpayer funds for such programs.

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

blob:https://www.foxnews.com/b56dd403-586c-46f8-9575-dfc12f553674

Listen to this article

4 min

The Trump administration says it has uncovered evidence that the Smithsonian Institution violated federal nondiscrimination laws and is threatening to withdraw support from its museums unless it corrects course, according to a letter recently made public by the Department of the Interior.

“The administration has recently uncovered evidence that the Smithsonian leadership’s institutional culture may have resulted in significant violations of Federal antidiscrimination law, including creating a hostile work environment and engaging in practices that classify individuals and allocate opportunities, funding and other benefits on the basis of race, ethnicity and other protected characteristics,” a letter sent jointly to the Smithsonian by the DOI and White House reads.

Specific evidence of illegal activity on the part of the Smithsonian was not included in the letter, and the DOI did not provide further information when reached for comment. A recent Fox News Digital investigation found that many leading figures at the Smithsonian, including those involved in hiring, have been strong proponents of diversity, equity and inclusion — something the Trump administration has previously framed as racially discriminatory.

TRUMP’S SMITHSONIAN CLASH EXPOSES STRIKING PATTERN AMONG MUSEUM CURATORS

President Donald Trump blasted the Smithsonian on Truth Social Tuesday for being “OUT OF CONTROL” and “woke.”(Getty Images)

Conservative political leaders, led by President Donald Trump, have accused the Smithsonian of allowing progressive ideology to shape its presentation of American history. An executive order signed in 2025 directed officials to remove what it called “improper ideology,” from the museum.

“The Executive Order signed by the President of the United States clearly states ‘the Secretary of the Interior, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the Administrator of General Services, and the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy shall identify and utilize any and all available authorities to promote the policy of this order and to restore trust in the Smithsonian Institution,” a DOI spokesperson told Fox News Digital.

TRUMP TARGETS BIDEN-ERA BILLION-DOLLAR SMITHSONIAN BUDGETS AMID ANTI-‘WOKE’ PUSH

Liberals have framed criticism of the Smithsonian as a partisan attempt to influence the presentation of history. (Alex Wroblewski/AFP via Getty Images)

Liberals, meanwhile, have framed conservative criticism of the Smithsonian as a partisan attempt to influence the public presentation of history.

Unless the Smithsonian remedies the issues outlined in the DOI’s recent letter, as well as the general bias which conservatives allege exists at the institution, the administration says it will consider pulling support from it. The threats this time around, however, differ from the ongoing fight over the roughly $1 billion a year in federal funding the Smithsonian receives.

SMITHSONIAN’S TAXPAYER FUNDS FACE CHOPPING BLOCK AS GOP DEMANDS ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ‘WOKE’ HISTORY

The Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History was called out for being “ideologically captured” and presenting woke revisionist history.(Kevin Carter)

“Those executive departments and agencies cannot in good conscience continue to support the Smithsonian under current leadership by, for example, loaning artifacts for exhibits, enabling procurement processes and making discretionary grants,” the letter reads.

While the letter does not provide specific changes that the administration would like to see from the Smithsonian, it does note that an “appropriate response” from the organization “must likewise address executive leadership and institutional ideology.”

That wording could be significant as the institution operates independently but is overseen by board members appointed by congressional resolutions that the president must sign into law. By October, there will be four openings on the institution’s board of regents, a fact the administration may leverage to increase its influence over the Smithsonian.

“Very few Americans want the Smithsonian National Museum of American History to be used, in the words of its director, as a ‘prime tool of social justice’ and as an instrument of ideological activism and advocacy,” Vince Haley, the director of the White House’s Domestic Policy Council told Fox News Digital when asked about the letter. “Unfortunately, the Saving America’s Story report demonstrates, using the statements of Museum leadership and the interpretive guidelines adopted by the Museum, that this is exactly what the Smithsonian’s flagship museum has become.”

“During this 250th anniversary year of our heroic founding, the least our citizens are owed is an honest and inspiring account of American history. It should begin by telling the story of our Founding Fathers — who they were, what they did, and what they built. It is our hope and expectation that the Smithsonian will eventually rise once again to that noble obligation — to tell America’s story for our children, the world and future generations of Americans,” he added.

WATCH: SMITHSONIAN HISTORY MUSEUM DIRECTOR STUMBLES OVER BASIC QUESTIONS ON SEX: ‘I’M NOT SURE’

Anthea Hartig, director of the Smithsonian Institute’s National Museum of American History, testifies during a House subcommittee hearing titled “Rewriting American History: Examining the Smithsonian’s Efforts to Reshape the Past,” on July 21, 2026.(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

DOI requests that representatives from the Smithsonian meet with administration officials “at [their] earliest convenience” to discuss the alleged bias and civil rights violations present at the institution.

“The museum does not take sides in America’s political debates. We preserve and document the evidence of American life in all of its breadth, so that the public can encounter the past and draw their own conclusions,” National Museum of American History’s director Anthea Hartig said at a July congressional hearing.

The Smithsonian declined to comment on the letter when reached by Fox News Digital on Thursday.

Recent reporting has found that the museum’s leadership and many of its curators have backgrounds in liberal advocacy or Democratic politics. In addition to exhibits at the National Museum of American History, which the Trump administration characterized as demonizing America, even the Smithsonian-run National Zoo is inundated with information about DEI and gender equity.

American automakers urge Congress to ban Chinese vehicle sales in the U.S.

September 3, 2026 5:18 PM EDT / CBS News

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

A trade group representing American automakers is urging Congress to permanently bar the sale of Chinese vehicles in the U.S.

In a letter to senior lawmakers, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation on Thursday called on them to “enact a permanent ban on the sale, import and manufacture of Chinese connected vehicles, hardware and software” in the U.S., citing China’s alleged unfair trade practices, intellectual property theft and pattern of surveillance.

“This behavior is a feature of the Chinese approach and especially acute when it comes to China’s strategy to dominate global automotive manufacturing and critical supply chains,” wrote the group’s president and CEO, John Bozzella.

Bozzella also said that non-Chinese automakers are unfairly disadvantaged by China’s industrial and manufacturing policy, which the car industry group said threatens to undermine the U.S. automotive manufacturing sector.

U.S. automakers face mounting competition from Chinese rivals, including BYD, which is exporting more low-cost vehicles worldwide.

China has made particular headway in electric vehicles, where it is the world’s largest EV market and a growing exporter. Under a January trade deal with Canada, for example, China’s Geely Auto Group will be allowed to sell tens of thousands of EVs in the country every year, with Canadian tariffs set to drop from 100% to just 6%.

“China is capturing market share in Europe, Australia, Southeast Asia, Mexico and South America with vehicles capable of collecting, processing and transmitting sensitive vehicle and consumer data to the Chinese Communist Party,” Bozzella wrote.

“This hasn’t happened inside the U.S. yet, but given the scale and urgency of this threat, we urge you to enact a Chinese vehicle, software and hardware ban before adjourning this year and make this policy the law of the land,” he added.

Edited by Alain Sherter

Former NFL quarterback Mark Sanchez files motion for guilty plea in Indianapolis stabbing incident

September 3, 2026 / 6:55 PM EDT / CBS/AP

Former NFL quarterback and ex-Fox Sports analyst Mark Sanchez has filed a motion to plead guilty in connection with an October 2025 incident with a truck driver in whichhe was stabbed outside an Indianapolis hotel, court documents show.

It wasn’t immediately clear what charges Sanchez was pleading guilty to, but he is facing a felony battery charge and several misdemeanors, including unlawful entry of a motor vehicle and public intoxication.

The motion for a guilty plea and sentencing hearing was filed Thursday in Marion County, Indiana, Superior Court. A judge would need to accept the plea.

Former NFL broadcaster Mark Sanchez on the field prior to a game between the Arizona Cardinals and the San Francisco 49ers at Levi’s Stadium on Sept. 21, 2025, in Santa Clara, California. Brooke Sutton / Getty Images

“This is a positive development. We are finalizing an agreement with the prosecutor’s office that provides a path toward resolving the state’s case. We’re also encouraged by the constructive conversations taking place regarding the related civil matter. There is real momentum toward bringing this entire chapter to a close,” Nick Sanchez Jr., Mark Sanchez’s brother and legal adviser, said in a statement to CBS News.

The ex-NFL quarterback’s jury trial was scheduled to start Tuesday. The trial had been rescheduled five times since it was initially set to begin in December.

A police affidavit alleged that Sanchez, who was in town for the Colts vs. Raiders game at Lucas Oil Stadium in his capacity as a Fox Sports analyst, accosted 69-year-old Perry Tole, who had backed his truck into a hotel’s loading docks in downtown Indianapolis on Oct. 4, 2025. Tole told police and has claimed in a lawsuit that Sanchez entered the truck without permission, then physically blocked and shoved Tole from entering the truck and trying to get his phone.

Tole told police he “realized things had escalated, and he was now in physical danger, so he reached into his pocket and grabbed his pepper spray and sprayed Mr. Sanchez in the face,” the affidavit said.

When Sanchez moved toward Tole after he was sprayed, Tole pulled out his knife to defend himself and stabbed Sanchez “two or three times,” according to the affidavit.

Sanchez was hospitalized with stab wounds to his upper right torso, according to the affidavit. A picture of Tole that circulated online after the incident showed him in a neck brace on a hospital bed, covered in blood with a deep slash to the side of his face.

Tole told police and claimed in a civil lawsuit against Sanchez and Fox that the former broadcaster smelled of alcohol and his speech was slurred prior to the fight.

“We are pleased with the constructive and professional conversations we’ve had with Mr. Sanchez’s team,” attorney Matt Golitko, who represents Tole, said in a statement to CBS News. “Our discussions have been productive and we’re on a positive path toward an agreement that will allow the parties to move forward. Mr. Tole appreciates the progress we have achieved and looks forward to an amicable resolution.”

Sanchez, who played in the NFL for 10 years before retiring in 2019, was let go by Fox Sports following the incident. He spent the first four years of his professional career with the New York Jets before moving on to short stints with the Philadelphia Eagles, Denver Broncos, Dallas Cowboys, Chicago Bears and Washington.

Judge declares she’s ‘not the Lorax’ during hearing on Trump’s DC golf course renovation

2026-09-03T20:31:29.191Z / CNN

A federal judge on Thursday lamented the anger and threats she has faced over the removal of trees as part of President Donald Trump’s controversial effort to turn a public golf course in Washington, DC, into a championship-level one.

But the discussion about the removal of the trees at the East Potomac Golf Course – which dominated a proceeding that ostensibly was about the case schedule – was ultimately resolved with Trump’s opponents accepting the government’s explanation that the trees were chopped down for routine reasons.

US District Judge Ana Reyes noted the irony that this year is America’s 250th birthday and “a president chopping down cherry trees” is a court matter, harkening back to an apocryphal story associated with President George Washington.

“People are pretty upset,” she noted, adding that she has received threats, including from someone who said he would remove her if she didn’t “save the trees.”

“I do not speak for the trees, I am not the Lorax” she said, referencing the famous Dr. Seuss book and character while echoing its cadence of lines, “I am a judge.”

The leadup to Thursday’s hearing involved weeks of concern, anger and speculation among locals and activists over the National Park Service’s removal of trees at the course beginning in late August.

Department of Justice lawyers revealed that about 150 trees – 77 invasive and 77 dead, dying or hazardous trees were cut down. There are around 3,800 trees in the park.

“Trees throughout the park are regularly monitored for potential safety impacts to visitors, and when a tree is determined to be dying, declining or hazardous our arborists may make the decision to remove it,” the Department of Interior told CNN in a statement.

Shortly before the hearing, Trump’s opponents in the case submitted court declarations questioning the suggestions that the removed trees were rotting or a danger to players on the course.

However, during the hearing, the plaintiffs then backed down, saying they didn’t have reason to question the rationale for the tree’s removal.

Thursday’s hearing was scheduled as a status conference for the judge and parties to check in on where the litigation about the course should go next.

The administration has previously sought to dismiss the case. In court filings Wednesday, the Department of Interior pointed to recent rulings from the Supreme Court – siding with the administration in cases concerning the construction of the White House East Wing ballroom and an executive order on mail voting – and argued those rulings meant that the case should be thrown out.

Rather than deciding that request, the legal challengers are being given the okay to amend their earlier lawsuit to take into account those recent legal developments. Reyes indicated she would be willing to decide quickly whatever motion to dismiss the government may file then.

The DC Preservation League and two local golfers are pressing the judge to issue an order that would bar the Trump administration from moving ahead on the plan.

Reyes, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, has previously declined to block the work on the course because she was unconvinced that any laws had been broken.

Over the summer she instructed both sides to come to an agreement for the Trump administration to report on any new golf course activity to the court while initial stages of the litigation play out.

Reyes on Thursday expressed her satisfaction with how the government had kept her apprised, and was unwilling to order the administration to take additional steps to notify the legal challengers where the government was in the planning process for the course.

But she also voiced sympathy for the preservation league’s concerns that the administration could take a drastic action without any heads up that would be irreversible if a judge later found the action illegal.

“What I don’t want is to be here with a fait accompli,” Reyes said.

Trump, an avid golfer, first publicly proposed the idea in May about taking over and expanding the municipal golf course that sits on a 300-acre manmade peninsula just south of the National Mall.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum unveiled a rendering of the planned renovations from Fazio Design, a consultancy owned by the noted golf architect Tom Fazio, who designed Trump’s Bedminster golf course and three other of the president’s properties.

The Links currently offers two nine-hole courses and an 18-hole course.

“Like iconic public courses of Bethpage Black & Torrey Pines, East Potomac will offer locals — of the National Capital Region — championship-quality golf at affordable, highly discounted rates,” Burgum posted on X with a rendering of the Links plans .

Trump, Burgum and Fazio were photographed walking the course together in June, blueprints in hand.

Those plans have not yet been made publicly available, but appeared to have been updated and more expansive, with a nearly complete takeover of the entire peninsula. A playground, recreational area and a 9-hole course often used by more novice players have been jettisoned in favor of a single 18-hole course.

Trump said after the visit that the course was “dilapidated, worn out, and very dangerous and outdated.”

Speaking to Golf.com in June, Fazio said the president’s ambition is to upgrade the links to “literally a national monument,” where a national golf championship could be held.

“The president happens to be a guy of action,” Fazio said. “He wants to get this thing done so people can enjoy it, play it, and not one of these ‘10 years down the road and drag it out forever’ things. He wants to get it done now.”

The aim would be for the course to be ready for play by summer 2028, before Trump leaves office.

The administration has not yet brought plans before the two key federal agencies, the National Capitol Planning Commission (NCPC) and the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts (CFA), that review and approve major changes on federal property in Washington.

Former US pardon attorney Liz Oyer sues DOJ for unlawful firing

2026-09-03 22:32:37 UTC / Reuters

By Dan Rosenzweig-Ziff

September 3, 2026 10:32 PM UTC Updated 1 hour ago

Witness Elizabeth Oyer, former Department of Justice Pardon Attorney, attends the second day of Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings for U.S. Attorney General nominee Todd Blanche on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., July 16, 2026. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

WASHINGTON, Sept 3 (Reuters) – The former U.S. pardon attorney has sued the Justice Department over what she calls an unlawful firing after she said she declined to recommend restoring gun ​rights to actor Mel Gibson, a vocal supporter of President Donald Trump.

The suit ‌is the latest by a senior government official against the Trump administration over alleged wrongful termination.

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

Elizabeth Oyer, who served as pardon attorney from 2022-2025 and has become an outspoken critic of the administration and Attorney General ​Todd Blanche, alleged she was asked to ignore her concerns about Gibson’s history ​of domestic violence, among other issues, and recommend he regain firearm access, according ⁠to the suit filed on Thursday.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

After she refused, and refused another request from a staff ​member of Blanche, then the deputy attorney general, Oyer received termination papers from security officers. She ​was told she was being fired under Trump’s Article 2 authority, a section of the Constitution that establishes the presidency.

“This case is about much more than what happened to me,” Oyer said in a statement. “If career ​officials like me can be fired for refusing to bend the rules to serve the ​president’s friends, then the message to every public servant is clear: loyalty to a politician matters more than ‌loyalty ⁠to the Constitution.”

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Oyer’s suit, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., is seeking an order that declares her removal was unlawful, reinstates her federal service and restores her pay. She originally appealed her firing to the ​Merit Systems Protection Board ​in April 2025, after ⁠which an administrative judge dismissed her appeal.

Democratic lawmakers called Oyer to give testimony in July in opposition to Blanche’s nomination for attorney general. ​During that hearing, Oyer repeated her wrongful termination allegations. The day prior, ​Blanche said ⁠Oyer had been fired for reasons unrelated to Gibson.

“I didn’t even know of that. I had known nothing about Mel Gibson or that letter when I fired her. Nothing,” he told lawmakers.

He ⁠said it ​was instead in part related to commutation recommendations she ​had provided to former President Joe Biden. Oyer told lawmakers the next day that was the first time she heard ​her firing related to those recommendations.

blob:https://www.reuters.com/7c0c56da-a7a5-42b8-bee9-69ffb826c440

Reporting by Dan Rosenzweig-Ziff; Editing by Michael Learmonth and Stephen Coates

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

美汽车业协会促国会永久禁止中国汽车进入美国市场

2026年9月4日 07:15 / 联合早报

• 美国汽车创新联盟致函国会两党领袖，敦促年底前立法永久禁止中国汽车及网联软硬件进入美国市场。 – 联盟首席执行官博泽拉称中国车企倾销补贴车，呼吁休会前通过禁令法案，从国家安全层面回应威胁。 – 参议院商务委员会主席克鲁兹指出，法案限制中国实体持股条款或波及奔驰，须修改才可能成为法律。 – 比亚迪等中国车企正扩大全球出口并进入加墨市场，令美国汽车业高管担忧其可能很快进军美国市场。

2025年4月13日拍摄的无人机航拍画面显示，准备出口的电动车和集装箱停放在中国上海一座港口。 （路透社档案照片）

美国汽车业规模最大的行业协会致函国会参众两院两党领袖，敦促国会在年底前立法，永久禁止中国汽车及相关网联软件和硬件进入美国市场，理由是这些产品威胁美国经济和国家安全。

综合路透社和彭博社报道，美国汽车创新联盟在信中呼吁国会迅速采取行动。联盟成员包括通用汽车、福特、丰田、大众、现代、本田和斯泰兰蒂斯等主要车企。

联盟首席执行官博泽拉（John Bozzella）称，中国汽车制造商目前正在全球倾销获得补贴并搭载联网软硬件的汽车。这种情况尚未在美国发生，“但鉴于这一威胁的规模和紧迫性，我们敦促国会在今年休会前，通过禁止中国汽车、软件和硬件的法案，使这项政策正式成为美国法律”。

博泽拉说，通过法案“将发出明确的跨党派信号：面对中国谋求主导全球汽车制造业的战略，美国政府将从国家安全层面作出回应”。

目前，高额关税以及美国商务部针对中国等所谓外国对手的网联汽车系统实施的禁令，实际上已把中国汽车挡在美国市场之外。汽车业团体希望国会进一步把相关限制写入法律，使禁令永久化。

美国参议院商务委员会今年7月表决通过一项旨在强化相关禁令的法案，但法案要在国会获得最终通过，仍面临阻力。继汽车创新联盟和其他汽车业团体今年3月提出类似诉求后，这次再度施压，反映美国汽车业对中国车企的担忧不断升温。

根据一封此前未公开的信函，汽车创新联盟今年7月曾敦促参议院商务委员会在法案中明确规定，禁止商务部向比亚迪、奇瑞、上汽集团及其他“获得中国共产党补贴”的中国车企发放特定许可，准许它们在美国制造、销售或进口网联汽车。

不过，参议院商务委员会主席克鲁兹（Ted Cruz）指出，法案中禁止中国实体持股超过15%的车企在美销售汽车的条款，也可能波及奔驰，因为中国投资者合计持有奔驰近20%的非控股股权。他认为，法案还须修改，才可能成为法律。

在中国国内需求疲弱、价格竞争激烈之际，比亚迪和吉利汽车等企业正扩大出口，在全球市场迅速扩大份额。价格低廉、科技配置丰富的中国电动车也开始出现在加拿大和墨西哥，令美国汽车业高管更加担心这些车企可能很快进军美国市场。

中国驻美大使馆没有立即回应置评请求。中方反对美国限制中国汽车出口的措施。

Iran prefers conflict with US over peace to suppress internal uprising, human rights activist warns

2026-09-03T18:30:08-04:00 / Fox News

Majid Sadeghpour says Tehran’s leaders fear domestic uprising more than American airstrikes

By Louis Casiano, Fox News

Published September 3, 2026 6:30pm EDT

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6404559411112

Why Iran prefers perpetual low-level conflict to a peace deal with the US

The vulnerable regime is more afraid of widespread domestic unrest, says Dr. Majid Sadeghpour, a human rights activist and the political director of the Organization of Iranian-American Communities.

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

Regime leaders in Iran are more content to see continued confrontation with the United States and its Gulf neighbors rather than pursuing peace in an effort to keep their disenchanted population at bay, one expert says.

U.S. forces have launched airstrikes against Iran in recent days following a brief pause in hostilities amid renewed flare-ups in the Strait of Hormuz.

Tehran isn’t as concerned about military action against the country, but rather discontent among Iranians, Dr. Majid Sadeghpour, a human rights activist and the political director of the Organization of Iranian-American Communities, told Fox News Digital.

TRUMP RETALIATES AFTER IRAN ATTACK AS EXPERT WARNS REGIME IS GROWING MORE DANGEROUS

Fires are lit as anti-government protesters rally Jan. 8 in Tehran. Iran prefers a low-level conflict with the United States over peace to focus the attention of its citizens elsewhere, one human rights activist warned.(Getty Images, File)

Sadeghpour noted that U.S. officials offered guarantees to Tehran that provided a pathway to peace for Iran.

“You get America to give you a guarantee that it wouldn’t seek regime change. Nevertheless, they still attacked ships afterward,” Sadeghpour said. “They still attacked our bases in Jordan and Bahrain. So that speaks to the fact that the real threat to the regime is not the bombs from outside, but rather the population uprising.”

INSIDE TEHRAN: IRANIANS DESCRIBE IRGC’S BRUTAL RULE, POVERTY — ASK TRUMP TO ‘STAY THE COURSE’

Ships and tankers in the Strait of Hormuz off the coast of Musandam, Oman. President Donald Trump says he isn’t focused on bringing Tehran to the bargaining table.(Reuters, File)

“For a regime that’s militarized and requires friction, its survival now depends on that friction,” he added.

Iran has experienced major uprisings in recent years driven by economic collapse, high inflation, and deep discontent with the regime’s strict religious interpretation of Islam. In addition, the Iranian government has suppressed anti-government riots and protests with deadly force and arbitrary arrests and detention, according to human rights observers.

The war with the U.S. helps the regime, Sadeghpour said, by refocusing the Iranian public’s attention elsewhere.

Meanwhile, Iran has continued to target commercial ships in the strait in violation of an agreement not to do so, Vice President JD Vance said Thursday.

IRAN ACCELERATES EXECUTION CAMPAIGN AGAINST ANTI-REGIME ACTIVISTS AMID INTERNET CENSORSHIP

Regime leaders in Iran such as supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei are content to see continued confrontation with the U.S., an expert says.(Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto via Getty Images, File)

“The Iranians are doing what the Iranians do,” Vance said. “I think that they’re losing their capabilities by the day. I think they’re realizing… that their control over the Strait of Hormuz is effectively gone, and it’s a diminishing asset.”

In order to effect regime change, the U.S. should focus its efforts on the Iranian population, said Sadeghpour, because Iranian leaders will likely drag out the conflict with the U.S. for as long as they can.

“The regime is thinking about the day, the hour after the exhausted population gets calm, and will immediately look around, ‘how am I going to get rid of this regime? And who’s going to help me do that?’ And so that is what the regime is afraid of,” he said.

TRUMP REVIVES IRAN REGIME CHANGE SPECULATION WITH CRYPTIC CALL FOR PEOPLE TO ‘RISE UP’

Marines aboard USS New Orleans (LPD 18) stand watch in the Arabian Sea during naval blockade operations against Iran.(U.S. Central Command)

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump on Wednesday said he isn’t focused on bringing Tehran to the bargaining table, saying he “couldn’t care less” if Iran signs a “worthless” agreement.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“They are just playing out the inevitable,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “When are the Iranian people going to rise up and fight?”

Louis Casiano is a reporter for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to louis.casiano@fox.com.

Trump asks Supreme Court to OK sweeping changes for mail ballots

2026-09-03T20:19:04.431Z / CNN

President Donald Trump’s administration asked the Supreme Court on Thursday to give the US Postal Service sweeping power to withhold delivery of mail ballots, setting up an extraordinary showdown over voting at the high court less than two months before the November midterm election.

The emergency appeal, which leapfrogged lower courts still considering the case, is the culmination of a monthslong legal fight over an executive order the president signed in March that gave federal agencies an unprecedented role in elections. Voter advocacy groups and a coalition of 23 Democratic-led states challenged that order in federal court, arguing that neither the president nor the post office should have a role in choosing which mail ballots reach voters.

With the midterm elections nearing, and the first ballots entering the mail this week, the 6-3 conservative Supreme Court will be under enormous pressure to decide the case on an unusually speedy timeline. The Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to step in immediately with a short-term order that would allow the Postal Service to implement its new regulations.

The administration described its rules as “only modest envelope-design and addressee-information requirements.” Throughout its appeal, the administration framed its effort as having more to do with its power to regulate the mail than anything to do with elections.

“The rule thus plainly does not seize control of states’ administration of elections,” the administration told the high court. “It simply imposes reasonable preparation requirements for certain election-related mail.”

Since the justices last reviewed the issue in August — siding with the Trump administration— USPS has provided more detail about how it intends to implement Trump’s order. Many election officials have warned that it’s already too late to upend their mail ballot systems. And a whistleblower report asserted that the USPS is rushing to complete a complicated plan that could potentially disenfranchise millions of Americans.

“USPS’s mail ballot rule is an unconstitutional attempt to upend mail voting on the eve of an election,” said Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, part of the legal team representing the voting rights groups. “The district court temporarily blocked the rule’s key provision while it decides the request for preliminary relief through an order set to expire within days. Yet President Trump’s administration is running to the Supreme Court anyway. The only emergency here is the one the administration created.”

The court requested a response in the case by Tuesday morning, a sign that it is unlikely to decide the administration’s request immediately.

The Trump administration will need to clear a procedural hurdle before it can get the court to look at the USPS regulation closely. A lower court had blocked the USPS rule with a temporary order that is not normally appealable. However, the high court has sometimes allowed such appeals in the past, and Solicitor General D. John Sauer, the top appellate attorney for the administration, said it should do so in this case.

Trump, and several Republican states that support him, have framed the executive order as a minimal series of changes in postal rules to ensure a more secure election. In its appeal Thursday, the administration leaned into the idea that the changes are necessary to prevent fraud, echoing the president’s long stated false assertions of widespread voter fraud.

Without intervention, the Justice Department wrote, the lower court order blocking the administration “partially nullifies the Postal Service’s efforts to address the risk that the federal mails will be used to perpetrate voter fraud — a particularly pernicious species of fraud that dilutes the votes of lawful voters.”

But critics describe the order as a power grab over state-run mail ballots, which the president has repeatedly and baselessly blamed for his loss to former President Joe Biden in the 2020 election.

Under the regulations, states must submit lists of their eligible mail voters to USPS via an online portal in order to send ballots through the mail. If a name doesn’t appear on that list, the Postal Service would decline to deliver a mail ballot to them. The USPS rule would also require that election mail envelopes carry unique bar codes for each voter. States fear that adopting an entirely new mail ballot system weeks before the election could lead to systemic breakdowns in ballots reaching voters.

North Carolina is set to begin sending out its mail ballots on Friday.

It was a point the administration repeatedly stressed in its appeal as it attempted to arouse a sense of urgency from the court. It warned that as lower courts continued to work on the case, more and more states would begin sending ballots for this year’s election.

The emergency appeal requires the Supreme Court to resolve one of the most significant election-related questions it has been asked to take up in years. Last month, a divided court allowed the administration to continue working to implement its executive order, though it did so on technical grounds that offered little insight into how the conservative majority views the legality of Trump’s underlying order. The court’s three liberal justices dissented from that decision.

Days later, a federal court in Boston temporarily blocked the administration from carrying out the plan.

Democratic state officials and voting rights groups challenging the order note that the Constitution gives the power to run elections to the states, not the president, and they argue that Congress has given USPS no authority to police state mail ballot programs. But the Justice Department has countered that USPS has broad authority to change protocols for the mail. It has called attention to two examples where it has done so in the past: the delivery of cremated remains and replica explosives, such as dummy grenades.

The recent whistleblower report alleged that the agency was preparing to reject entire batches of ballots — which in some jurisdictions would delay the sending of tens of thousands ballots — if USPS found that just a single envelope in the batch did not align with the information within the portal.

This story has been updated with additional information.