作者: root

  • 明尼苏达州高级惩教官员否认国土安全部称该州释放危险罪犯的说法

    2026年1月21日 / 美国东部时间晚上9:49 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻

    明尼苏达州一位高级执法官员正在驳斥美国国土安全部反复提出的指控,即州政府一直将数百名危险罪犯释放到街头,而非移交给联邦移民执法人员。

    明尼苏达州惩教部专员保罗·施内尔(Paul Schnell)称这些说法”从根本上是错误的”,并警告称此类联邦宣传信息可能会破坏公众对移民执法和公共安全的信任。

    “我们与美国移民海关执法局(ICE)和ICE拘留请求(detainers)合作,”施内尔在周三接受哥伦比亚广播公司新闻采访时表示。”作为一项政策,我们长期以来一直这样做。他们怎么能说相反的话,真是难以置信。”

    此前,美国移民海关执法局(ICE)负责执法与遣返行动的代理执行副主任马科斯·查尔斯(Marcos Charles)周二指责明尼苏达州官员未能将人员移交给联邦拘留机构,并声称全州有超过1360份未决ICE拘留请求。

    这些是联邦要求当地执法部门在被拘留者刑满释放后最多拘留48小时的请求,以便ICE有时间决定是否将其拘留以启动驱逐程序。

    “最好的解决办法是在像监狱或拘留所这样安全可控的环境中把他们移交给我们,而不是将他们释放回街头,”查尔斯周二在圣保罗的新闻发布会上表示,并警告称释放这些人会将”孩子们上学的社区”置于危险之中。

    但惩教部专员表示,这些协调移交工作早已作为政策和州法律的一部分在持续进行。施内尔表示,他的部门在被监禁人员释放前几周会与ICE定期沟通,以便在有拘留请求时安排交接。根据明尼苏达州惩教部的数据,2025年有84人直接从州监狱转移到ICE拘留中心。

    为更好地了解这一问题的范围,施内尔表示其部门进行了全州调查。他们发现州监狱中有207人和县级监狱中有94人受到ICE拘留请求的约束——总计301人。这与联邦官员引用的1360人相差甚远。

    “我们无法解释这些数字如何一致,”施内尔说。”而且没有人坐下来向我们解释。”

    施内尔告诉哥伦比亚广播公司新闻,他的机构多次要求国土安全部调和这一差异,但没有收到任何文件证明存在移交失误或不遵守规定的情况。

    “如果我们犯了错误,我们会承担责任,”他说。”但到目前为止,还没有人向我们展示我们哪里失败了。”

    当被问及对施内尔言论的评论时,国土安全部发言人重申了该机构的主张,即明尼苏达州各地有数以百计的罪犯被释放,全州有1360人处于ICE拘留请求的约束之下。

    发言人没有回应施内尔提出的差异问题,而是列举了6名国土安全部称在明尼苏达州被释放的有刑事指控或定罪的人员,并呼吁州长蒂姆·瓦尔兹(Tim Walz)”承诺遵守所有ICE拘留请求”。

    施内尔表示,在某些情况下,是ICE选择不再拘留个人,而是在联邦监督下或释放到社区。他强调这是联邦当局而非州政府的决定。

    “我们没有将他们释放到社区,”他说。”我们将他们移交给了ICE。”

    施内尔还驳斥了国土安全部定期发布所谓”最恶劣罪犯”名单的做法,这些名单突出显示了ICE声称已逮捕的有严重刑事定罪的人员。但施内尔坚持称明尼苏达州惩教部已与ICE协调,移交了其中许多人的拘留权,并称之为”在许多情况下是宣传”。他补充说,在多个案例中,联邦当局在拘留后选择释放被拘留者。

    “这些人不是在明尼阿波利斯街头被逮捕的,”他说。”他们是被移交给ICE的。之后发生的事情不是我们的决定。”

    施内尔承认,各县在遵守ICE民事拘留请求方面存在差异——特别是在包括明尼阿波利斯的亨内平县这样的大型司法管辖区。但他也强调,惩教部的权力仅限于州监狱系统,而非地方监狱。

    尽管存在严重分歧,施内尔强调,惩教部工作人员与ICE官员之间的日常合作仍然很密切。

    “在操作层面,工作人员之间的合作完全按应有的方式进行,”他说。”这也是为什么我认为他们的工作人员可能同样感到困惑。”

    施内尔表示,他现在希望与国土安全部高层进行直接对话,以调和数据和宣传信息的矛盾——而不是公开指责。

    “准确处理此事符合公共安全的最大利益,”他说。”修辞无法解决任何问题,事实才能。”

    随着移民执法在全国和地方层面持续成为争议焦点,这场争端凸显了一个更深层次的挑战:一个碎片化的体系,联邦、州和地方实体在不同的法律框架下运作,获取的数据系统各不相同——在此过程中往往相互指责。

    “我们非常关心公共安全,”施内尔说。”这就是我们遵循这项政策的原因。而且我们将继续协调拘留权的移交——这是底线。”

    [跳过广告 继续观看广告后内容]
    访问广告商网站[进入页面]

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/getuid
    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/headshot-600-nicole-sganga.jpg

    Top Minnesota corrections official denies DHS claim that the state is releasing dangerous criminals

    January 21, 2026 / 9:49 PM EST / CBS News

    A top Minnesota law enforcement official is rejecting repeated accusations by the Department of Homeland Security that state authorities have been releasing hundreds of dangerous criminals into the streets, rather than turning them over to federal immigration agents.

    Paul Schnell, the commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Corrections, called the claims “fundamentally false” and warned that such federal messaging risks undermining public trust in both immigration enforcement and public safety.

    “We cooperate with ICE and ICE detainers,” Schnell told CBS News in an interview on Wednesday. “We have, as a matter of policy, done that for a long, long time. How they can say otherwise is unbelievable.”

    It came after Marcos Charles, ICE’s acting executive associate director for Enforcement and Removal Operations on Tuesday accused Minnesota officials of failing to turn people over to federal custody — and claimed there were more than 1,360 pending ICE detainers statewide.

    Those are federal requests to local law enforcement to detain individuals for up to 48 hours after they’re set to be released from criminal confinement — which gives ICE time to decide whether to take them into custody to begin deportation proceedings.

    1/1 Skip Ad Continue watching after the adVisit Advertiser website[GO TO PAGE]

    “The best solution is to turn them over to us in a safe, controlled setting like a jail or prison instead of releasing them back onto the streets,” Charles said at a news conference in St. Paul, Tuesday, warning that releases put communities “where your children go to school” at risk.

    But the Department of Corrections commissioner said those coordinated turnovers are already happening — and have been for years, as a matter of policy and state law. Schnell said his department routinely communicates with ICE in the weeks before an incarcerated person’s release to arrange handoffs if a detainer is in place. And according to Minnesota corrections data, 84 people were transferred directly from state prisons to ICE custody in 2025.

    To better understand the scope of the issue, Schnell said his department conducted a statewide survey. They found 207 individuals in state prisons and 94 in county jails are subject to ICE detainers — 301 total. This is far short of the 1,360 cited by federal officials.

    “We cannot explain how those numbers square,” Schnell said. “And nobody is sitting down with us to explain it.”

    Schnell told CBS News his agency has repeatedly asked DHS to reconcile the discrepancy but has received no documentation showing missed transfers or failures to comply.

    “If we made a mistake, we would own it,” he said. “But to date, no one has shown us where we failed.”

    Asked for comment on Schnell’s remarks, a DHS spokesperson reiterated the agency’s assertions that hundreds of criminals have been released across Minnesota and that 1,360 people in custody statewide are subject to active ICE detainers.

    The spokesperson did not address the discrepancies raised by Schnell, but pointed to a list of six people with criminal charges or convictions that DHS says were released in Minnesota, and called on Gov. Tim Walz to “commit to honoring all ICE detainers.”

    In some cases, Schnell said, it is ICE that chooses not to detain individuals any longer, releasing them under federal supervision or into the community. He emphasized that this is a decision made by federal authorities, not the state.

    “We didn’t release them into the community,” he said. “We released them to ICE.”

    Schnell also pushed back against the Department of Homeland Security’s regular publication of so-called “worst of the worst” lists, which highlight individuals with serious criminal convictions ICE claims to have arrested. But Schnell insisted Minnesota corrections had coordinated with ICE to transfer custody of many of those people and called the lists “propaganda, in many instances.” He added that in multiple cases, federal authorities opt to release detainees after they’re in ICE custody.

    “These weren’t people swept up on Minneapolis streets,” he said. “They were released to ICE. What happened after that was not our decision.”

    Schnell acknowledged that compliance with civil ICE detainers varies at the county level — particularly in large jurisdictions like Hennepin County, which includes Minneapolis. But he also stressed that the Department of Corrections’ authority is limited to the state prison system, not local jails.

    Despite the sharp disagreements, Schnell emphasized that day-to-day cooperation between Corrections Department staff and ICE officers on the ground remains strong.

    “Staff to staff, operationally, this is working exactly the way it should,” he said. “Which is why I think their staff are probably equally confused.”

    What he wants now, Schnell said, is a direct conversation at senior levels of DHS to reconcile data and messaging — not public accusations.

    “It’s in the best interest of public safety to get this right,” he said. “Rhetoric doesn’t solve anything. Facts do.”

    As immigration enforcement continues to be a flashpoint nationally and locally, the dispute underscores a deeper challenge: a fragmented system in which federal, state, and local entities operate under different authorities, with access to varying data systems — often speaking past one another in the process.

    “We care deeply about public safety,” Schnell said. “That’s why we follow this policy. And we will continue to coordinate the transfer of custody — period.”

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/getuid
    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/headshot-600-nicole-sganga.jpg

  • 联邦通信委员会称电视脱口秀必须为政治候选人提供平等时段

    2026年1月21日 / 美国东部时间晚上10:30 / CBS新闻

    联邦通信委员会周三警告电视广播公司,日间脱口秀和深夜节目必须为对立的政治候选人提供平等的时段。

    这一举措针对的是总统特朗普长期以来声称存在政治偏见的电视节目类型,这促使总统呼吁撤销广播公司的联邦通信委员会牌照。

    该公告依据一项已有数十年历史的联邦法律,该法律要求任何获得联邦通信委员会牌照的广播公司,如果允许政治候选人通过其电波露面,也必须为所有竞选同一职位的其他候选人提供“平等机会”。该法律将“真实新闻广播”和新闻采访排除在平等时段规则之外。

    2006年,联邦通信委员会曾表示,新闻豁免适用于“《杰·雷诺今夜秀》上的采访”,这意味着深夜喜剧节目可以让当时的加州州长候选人阿诺德·施瓦辛格(Arnold Schwarzenegger)上镜,而无需邀请他的民主党对手。

    但在周三发布的一份四页通知中,联邦通信委员会表示,“并非所有深夜和日间娱乐节目都适用豁免”。监管机构表示,是否适用豁免将逐案决定,并且“没有任何证据表明这些节目中的采访符合新闻豁免条件”。

    联邦通信委员会主席布伦丹·卡尔(Brendan Carr)是特朗普的盟友,他在社交平台X上写道:“多年来,老牌电视网一直认为其深夜和日间脱口秀符合‘真实新闻’节目标准——即使其动机纯粹是党派政治目的。今天,联邦通信委员会提醒他们有义务为所有候选人提供平等机会。”

    联邦通信委员会没有点名任何特定节目。但特朗普在Truth Social平台上转发了一则新闻标题,称联邦通信委员会正在“针对”两个长期惹恼总统的美国广播公司(ABC)节目——“The View”和“Jimmy Kimmel Live!”。卡尔在X上分享了特朗普帖子的截图。

    美国广播公司没有回应CBS新闻就联邦通信委员会通知的置评请求。同样播出深夜节目并受到特朗普批评的全国广播公司(NBC)和哥伦比亚广播公司(CBS)也拒绝置评。

    民主党联邦通信委员会委员安娜·戈麦斯(Anna Gomez)尖锐批评了联邦通信委员会的公告,称其“是本委员会持续审查和控制言论运动的升级”。她还指出该通知“具有误导性”,因为联邦通信委员会尚未正式修改任何规则,而规则修改通常需要公开征求意见期和委员投票。

    戈麦斯在一份声明中表示:“广播公司不应因害怕监管报复而被迫淡化、净化或避免批评性报道。广播电台有权播出具有新闻价值的内容,即使这些内容是批评掌权者的。这种权利今天不会改变,明天也不会改变,仅仅因为本届政府想要压制批评者而改变。”

    特朗普多年来一直与批评他的脱口秀主持人不和。去年夏天,他对哥伦比亚广播公司母公司派拉蒙决定停播《斯蒂芬·科尔伯特深夜秀》表示赞赏;今年9月,他对吉米·坎摩尔在评论保守派活动家查理·柯克遇刺事件后的言论表示支持,并呼吁ABC临时停播《吉米·坎摩尔秀》;他还公开要求全国广播公司解雇深夜主持人吉米·法伦和塞思·迈耶斯。

    总统长期以来一直主张,联邦通信委员会应撤销持续批评他的电视广播公司的牌照。联邦通信委员会传统上对电视网播出的内容施加的影响有限,部分原因是受到第一修正案的限制。

    “他们只给我负面宣传,”特朗普在9月对记者说,“我的意思是,他们获得了牌照。我认为他们的牌照可能应该被吊销。这取决于布伦丹·卡尔。”

    这一问题引起了卡尔的关注,他经常指出要求广播公司以“公共利益”为导向的法律。

    在ABC临时停播坎摩尔节目数小时前,卡尔曾公开敦促迪士尼旗下的电视网“采取行动”回应喜剧演员对柯克的评论,他在一次播客采访中表示“这里有联邦通信委员会可以采取的措施”。

    “我们可以选择简单的方式或艰难的方式,”卡尔当时说。

    这些言论遭到了两党批评,德克萨斯州共和党参议员泰德·克鲁兹(Ted Cruz)表示,卡尔越界了,可能会为下次民主党总统执政时树立不良先例。

    “老实说,这简直是《好家伙》(电影)里的情节。就像黑手党老大走进酒吧说‘你们这地方不错,可惜了’,”克鲁兹模仿黑帮老大的口音评论卡尔对坎摩尔的言论。

    配图链接1
    配图链接2
    配图链接3
    配图链接4
    配图链接5
    配图链接6
    配图链接7
    配图链接8
    配图链接9
    配图链接10
    配图链接11
    配图链接12
    配图链接13

    视频链接

    FCC says TV talk shows must offer equal time to political candidates

    January 21, 2026 / 10:30 PM EST / CBS News

    The Federal Communications Commission warned TV broadcasters Wednesday that daytime talk shows and late-night programs must give equal time to opposing political candidates.

    The move addressed a genre of TV that President Trump has long argued is politically biased, leading to calls from the president to revoke broadcasters’ FCC licenses.

    The announcement hinges on a decades-old federal law requiring any FCC-licensed broadcaster that lets a political candidate appear on its airwaves to also offer “equal opportunities” to all other candidates running for the same office. The law exempts “bona fide newscasts” and news interviews from the equal time rule.

    In 2006, the FCC said the news exemption applied to an interview on “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno,” meaning the late-night comedy show could feature then-California gubernatorial candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger on-air without also inviting his Democratic opponent.

    But in a four-page notice on Wednesday, the FCC said it is “not the case” that all late-night and daytime entertainment shows are exempt. The regulator said it decides whether the exemption applies on a case-by-case basis, and it “has not been presented with any evidence” that interviews on those shows qualify for the news exemption.

    FCC Chair Brendan Carr, a Trump ally, wrote on X: “For years, legacy TV networks assumed that their late night & daytime talk shows qualify as ‘bona fide news’ programs – even when motivated by purely partisan political purposes. Today, the FCC reminded them of their obligation to provide all candidates with equal opportunities.”

    The FCC did not call out any specific shows by name. But Mr. Trump reposted a news headline on Truth Social that said the FCC is taking “aim” at two ABC shows that have long drawn the president’s ire — “The View” and “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” Carr shared a screenshot of Mr. Trump’s post on X.

    ABC did not respond to a request for comment from CBS News on the FCC’s notice. NBC and CBS, which also air late-night shows criticized by Mr. Trump, declined to comment.

    Democratic FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez sharply criticized the FCC’s announcement, calling it “an escalation in this FCC’s ongoing campaign to censor and control speech.” She also argued the notice was “misleading” since the FCC hasn’t formally changed any of its rules, a process that typically involves a public comment period and a vote by the commissioners.

    “Broadcasters should not feel pressured to water down, sanitize, or avoid critical coverage out of fear of regulatory retaliation,” Gomez said in a statement. “Broadcast stations have a constitutional right to carry newsworthy content, even when that content is critical of those in power. That does not change today, it will not change tomorrow, and it will not change simply because of this Administration’s desire to silence its critics.”

    Mr. Trump has feuded with critical talk show hosts for years. He celebrated CBS parent company Paramount’s decision to end “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” last summer, and he hailed ABC’s decision in September to temporarily preempt “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” following comments Kimmel made about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. And he’s publicly called on NBC to fire late-night hosts Jimmy Fallon and Seth Meyers.

    The president has also long argued that the FCC should revoke TV broadcast licenses for networks that consistently criticize him. The FCC has traditionally exerted limited influence over the content aired by TV networks, partly due to First Amendment constraints.

    “They give me only bad publicity or press,” Mr. Trump told reporters in September. “I mean, they’re getting a license. I would think maybe their license should be taken away. It will be up to Brendan Carr.”

    The issue has drawn the attention of Carr, who has regularly pointed to laws requiring broadcasters to operate in the “public interest.”

    Hours before ABC temporarily took Kimmel off the air, Carr publicly urged the Disney-owned TV network to “take action” in response to the comedian’s remarks on Kirk, saying in a podcast interview that “there are avenues here for the FCC.”

    “We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” Carr said at the time.

    Those comments drew bipartisan criticism, with Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas arguing Carr overstepped and could set a bad precedent the next time there’s a Democratic president.

    “I gotta say, that’s right out of ‘Goodfellas.’ That’s right out of a mafioso coming into a bar, going, ‘nice bar you have here, it’d be a shame if something happened to it,'” Cruz said of Carr’s remarks on Kimmel, mimicking a mob boss’s accent.

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/gettyimages-1773838149.jpg

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/cbs-saturday-morning-promo.jpg
    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/the-pitt-1280.jpg
    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/extended-noah-wyle.jpg

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/transcoded-1765581702.png
    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/gettyimages-1478517517.jpg
    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/gettyimages-1247598337-1.jpg
    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/untitled-design-32.png

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/transcoded-1765581702.png

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/u
    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/ip_match
    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/getuid
    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/cm

    https://www.cbsnews.com/video/first-amendment-lawyer-jimmy-kimmel-free-speech/

  • 美国四项儿童疫苗接种建议:有何变化?

    2026年1月22日 上午10:09 UTC / 路透社

    作者:Puyaan Singh 和 Sneha S K

    [1/2]美国佐治亚州亚特兰大市疾病控制与预防中心(CDC)主校区,2025年8月27日。路透社/Alyssa Pointer/文件照片 购买授权,新标签页打开

    • 公司
    • 葛兰素史克公司 关注
    • 默克公司 关注
    • 辉瑞公司 关注

    显示更多公司

    1月22日(路透社)——特朗普政府撤销了几十年的儿童常规流感和另外三种传染病疫苗接种指南,称这些疫苗的使用应由父母和医疗保健提供者决定。

    这些变化是卫生部长小罗伯特·F·肯尼迪(Robert F. Kennedy Jr.)推动重塑美国疫苗政策的一部分,此举遭到主要医疗团体反对,且缺乏科学证据支持,此前于去年取消了儿童通用新冠和乙肝疫苗接种建议。

    订阅路透社健康动态新闻通讯,及时了解最新医疗突破和医疗趋势。点击此处注册。

    广告 · 滚动继续阅读

    领先的医疗机构和超过20个州卫生部门表示,他们将继续向美国儿童推荐这些疫苗,警告称从广泛使用转向不再推荐将导致更多感染、住院和死亡。以下是疾病控制与预防中心疫苗建议的变化情况:

    轮状病毒


    旧计划: 推荐婴儿常规接种口服液体疫苗,包括默克公司(MRK.N)的RotaTeq,在2、4和6个月时接种,或葛兰素史克公司(GSK.L)的Rotarix,在2和4个月时接种,首剂需在15周内完成。该系列接种需在8个月内完成。

    新计划: 建议采用共同临床决策模式,即父母与医疗保健提供者协商是否为孩子接种疫苗。

    采用时间及原因: 1998年,美国首个轮状病毒疫苗RotaShield(由惠氏公司研发,后被辉瑞公司收购)被推荐,但因可能导致致命性胃肠道副作用而迅速撤回。2006年美国开始推荐RotaTeq,2008年推荐Rotarix,当时研究显示这两种疫苗在预防严重胃肠炎方面安全性和有效性均较高。当时每年有5.5万至7万名儿童因轮状病毒住院,因此预防成为公共卫生优先事项。

    美国表示,转向共同临床决策是为了与其他富裕国家保持一致。在欧洲,包括法国和德国在内的17个国家仍常规推荐接种该疫苗。

    流感


    旧计划: 建议6个月及以上人群常规接种流感疫苗,年幼儿童根据既往接种史和年龄适宜配方接种1或2剂。

    新计划: 建议对普通人群采用共同临床决策模式,对高风险人群强烈推荐。

    采用时间及原因: 2010年,CDC采用通用年度接种建议,以简化信息传达并扩大2009年H1N1流感大流行后的保护范围,取代了复杂的风险分层推荐。

    最新疾病负担: CDC估计,截至2025年1月3日的2025-26流感季,美国成人和儿童中至少有1500万例流感感染、18万例住院和7400例死亡。公共卫生专家称,接种率低、假期旅行和错误信息是导致病例激增的原因。

    美国称,这一变化是合理的,认为需要更强的证据支持通用接种,且国际上对此缺乏广泛共识。在欧洲,16个国家仍常规推荐接种流感疫苗。

    脑膜炎球菌疾病


    旧计划: 建议11-12岁儿童常规接种MCV4疫苗(由葛兰素史克等公司生产,商品名各异)以预防相关细菌引起的脑膜炎球菌疾病,并在16岁时加强接种。对于健康16-23岁人群,基于共同决策模式推荐MenB疫苗;对大学生等群居环境高风险人群常规接种。

    脑膜炎球菌疾病由脑膜炎奈瑟菌引起,常表现为脑膜炎(脑和脊髓膜炎症)或败血症,通过呼吸道分泌物密切接触传播,即使经抗生素治疗,死亡率仍达10%-15%。

    新计划: 建议基于共同临床决策模式,高风险人群仍需接种。

    采用时间及原因: 1985年,CDC首次建议对高风险人群和暴发控制接种脑膜炎球菌疫苗。2005年开始推荐青少年常规接种MenACWY疫苗,2007年进一步扩大接种范围,因该病进展迅速、大学宿舍等场所暴发风险高、死亡率高。

    最新疾病负担: CDC数据显示,2025年美国脑膜炎球菌疾病病例415例,较2024年的523例有所下降。

    根据美国传染病学会期刊发表的研究,脑膜炎球菌疾病发病率从1998年的约0.92例/10万人降至2007年的约0.33例/10万人。

    CDC称,基于这些低发病率和国际共识不足,取消MCV4常规接种。在欧洲,20个国家推荐接种MCV4或MenB疫苗中的一种或两种。

    甲型肝炎


    旧计划: 建议12个月至23个月的所有儿童接种两剂甲肝疫苗;对高风险人群(如前往流行区旅行者、吸毒者、慢性肝病患者)进行针对性补种。

    新计划: 对高风险人群外,建议采用共同临床决策模式。

    采用时间及原因: 2006年CDC开始推荐甲肝疫苗,研究表明儿童即使症状轻微或无症状也会传播病毒,而接种可减少社区暴发。

    甲型肝炎通过受污染的食物或水或密切接触传播,可导致数周甚至数月的疲劳、恶心、黄疸、发热和腹痛。常规儿童接种使美国甲肝发病率到2006年降低约90%。

    最新疾病负担: CDC称,2023年美国甲肝发病率为0.5例/10万人。

    CDC表示,此前美国甲肝每年约2.1万例,儿童感染常见。在疫苗普及前,甲肝发病率为21,000例/年。

    美国称,这一转变反映了国内发病率极低,且国际上缺乏对通用接种的共识。

    欧洲仅少数国家常规推荐甲肝疫苗,而墨西哥(该病流行区)推荐接种。一项回顾性分析估计,2000-2019年美国甲肝平均发病率为14.7例/10万人。

    报道:Puyaan Singh 和 Sneha S K 班加罗尔报道;编辑:Caroline Humer 和 Bill Berkrot

    我们的标准:路透社信托原则,新标签页打开

    Four US childhood vaccine recommendations: How have they changed?

    January 22, 2026 10:09 AM UTC / Reuters

    By Puyaan Singh and Sneha S K

    节点运行失败

    Item 1 of 2 The main campus of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, Georgia, U.S., August 27, 2025. REUTERS/Alyssa Pointer/File Photo

    [1/2]The main campus of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, Georgia, U.S., August 27, 2025. REUTERS/Alyssa Pointer/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

    • Companies
    • GSK plc Follow
    • Merck & Co Inc Follow
    • Pfizer Inc Follow

    Show more companies

    Jan 22 (Reuters) – The Trump administration has rolled back decades-old guidance recommending routine childhood vaccination against influenza and three other infectious diseases, saying their use should instead be decided between parents and healthcare providers.

    The changes, part of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s push to recast U.S. vaccine policy over objections of major medical groups and despite a lack of scientific evidence for the moves, follow last year’s removal of universal COVID‑19 and hepatitis B recommendations for children.

    Keep up with the latest medical breakthroughs and healthcare trends with the Reuters Health Rounds newsletter. Sign up here.

    Advertisement · Scroll to continue

    Leading medical organizations and more than 20 state health departments have said they will continue to recommend these vaccines for U.S. children, warning that a shift from their widespread use will lead to more infections, hospitalizations and deaths. Here is how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention vaccine recommendations have changed:

    ROTAVIRUS


    Old schedule: Recommended universal vaccination with oral liquid vaccines including Merck’s (MRK.N), opens new tab RotaTeq at 2, 4 and 6 months, or GSK’s (GSK.L), opens new tab Rotarix at 2 and 4 months, with the first dose due by 15 weeks. The series was to be completed by 8 months.

    Advertisement · Scroll to continue

    New schedule: Recommends shared clinical-decision-making in which parents consult healthcare providers on whether the child should be inoculated.

    When and why adopted: In 1998, the first U.S. rotavirus vaccine called RotaShield from Wyeth, later acquired by Pfizer (PFE.N), opens new tab, was recommended but soon withdrawn due to a potentially deadly gastrointestinal side effect. The U.S. began recommending RotaTeq in 2006 and Rotarix in 2008 after studies showed strong safety and efficacy at preventing severe gastroenteritis. At the time of the recommendations, there were 55,000 to 70,000 hospitalizations of children annually, making prevention a public‑health priority.

    The U.S. said it was shifting to shared clinical-decision‑making to align with other similar wealthy countries. In Europe, 17 countries including France and Germany recommend the shot routinely.

    节点运行失败

    INFLUENZA


    Old schedule: Recommended universal vaccination at ages six months and older, with one or two doses for young children depending on prior vaccination and age‑appropriate formulations.

    New schedule: Recommends shared clinical-decision-making for the general population and strongly recommends for high-risk groups.

    When and why adopted: CDC adopted universal annual vaccination in 2010 to simplify messaging and expand protection following the 2009 H1N1 flu pandemic, replacing complex risk-based recommendations.

    Latest disease burden: The CDC estimates at least 15 million flu illnesses, 180,000 hospitalizations and 7,400 deaths through January 3 for the 2025–26 season among adults and children. Low vaccination rates, holiday travel, and misinformation are contributing to the spike, public health experts said.

    The U.S. said the change was warranted, claiming it needed stronger evidence for its universal use and a lack of broad agreement internationally on the inoculations. In Europe, it is recommended in 16 countries.

    MENINGOCOCCAL DISEASE


    Old schedule: Recommended routine MCV4 vaccination – sold under various brand names by GSK (GSK.L), opens new tab and Sanofi (SASY.PA), opens new tab among others – to protect against meningococcal disease caused by related bacteria at ages 11 to 12 with a booster at 16.

    Recommended MenB for meningococcal disease related to serogroup B under shared decision-making to healthy 16- to 23-year‑olds and routinely to high-risk groups, such as college students and others living in communal settings.

    Meningococcal disease is caused by the Neisseria meningitidis bacterium and most often presents as meningitis, an inflammation of the membranes covering the brain and spinal cord, or as a bloodstream infection. It spreads through respiratory secretions during close contact and has a fatality rate of 10% to 15% even with antibiotic treatment.

    New schedule: Recommends based on shared clinical-decision-making and for those in high-risk groups.

    When and why adopted: In 1985, the CDC gave its first recommendation for vaccination for high‑risk groups and in outbreak control. It recommended routine adolescent MenACWY vaccination in 2005, expanding it in 2007, due to the disease’s rapid progression, outbreak risk in settings such as college dorms, and high fatality rates.

    Latest disease burden: The CDC estimates 415 U.S. cases in 2025, down from 523 cases in 2024.

    The incidence of meningococcal disease fell from around 0.92 cases per 100,000 people in 1998 to about 0.33 cases per 100,000 in 2007, according to a study published in an Infectious Diseases Society of America journal.

    The CDC cited those low rates and lack of consensus internationally as the reason for dropping routine vaccination with MCV4. In Europe, 20 countries recommend either or both shots.

    HEPATITIS A


    Old schedule: Recommended two doses for all children aged 12 months to 23 months; and targeted catch-up vaccination for at-risk groups including travelers to regions of endemic disease, people who use drugs and those with chronic liver disease.

    New schedule: Recommends shared clinical-decision-making except for groups at high-risk.

    When and why adopted: The CDC began recommending the hep A shot in 2006 after studies showed children often transmit the virus despite mild or no symptoms, and that vaccination reduced community outbreaks.

    Hepatitis A spreads through contaminated food or water or close contact and can cause weeks to months of fatigue, nausea, jaundice, fever, and abdominal pain. Routine childhood vaccination cut U.S. incidence by around 90% by 2006.

    Latest disease burden: The CDC said there were 0.5 cases per 100,000 people reported in the U.S. in 2023.

    Prior to the vaccine’s adoption, hepatitis A cases numbered around 21,000 annually, and infections were common among children, CDC said.

    The U.S. said the shift reflects very low domestic incidence and limited peer‑nation consensus for universal vaccination.

    Few European countries recommend it universally, while Mexico, where the disease is endemic, does. A retrospective analysis estimated an average 14.7 U.S. cases per 100,000 from 2000–2019.

    Reporting by Puyaan Singh and Sneha S K in Bengaluru; Editing by Caroline Humer and Bill Berkrot

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

  • 特朗普周二戏剧性逆转英国向毛里求斯移交查戈斯群岛主权计划,同时警告此举可能危及美国对迪戈加西亚军事基地的使用权

    特朗普的立场转变凸显了一位国防专家所谓的”新特朗普主义”,他将总统对查戈斯群岛协议的反对与对格陵兰岛的推动联系起来,并指出毛里求斯日后可能反悔的担忧。

    周二,特朗普在其”真实社交”平台上发文,称英国的查戈斯群岛决定”是极其愚蠢的行为”。

    “令人震惊的是,我们‘杰出的’北约盟友英国目前正计划将迪戈加西亚岛——美国重要军事基地所在地——移交给毛里求斯,而且毫无理由,”特朗普写道,”毫无疑问,中国和俄罗斯已经注意到这一完全软弱的行为。”

    [特朗普在万斯格陵兰岛关键会议前向北约发出严厉警告]

    亨利·杰克逊协会国家安全中心主任约翰·亨明斯告诉福克斯新闻数字版:”特朗普已经180度大转弯,部分原因是英国支持丹麦对格陵兰岛的主权主张,部分原因是白宫概述的新战略。”

    他解释道:”这些举动是相互关联的,也是11月《国家安全战略》中概述的‘新特朗普主义’的一部分。”

    “迪戈加西亚岛对北京控制从中东石油资源丰富地区到中国工业腹地之间的重要航运路线的战略构成潜在威胁,”他补充道,描述了”每天有近2370万桶石油通过印度洋运输,该基地在中美台湾问题冲突中至关重要。”

    [特朗普在民意调查显示公众支持率低时加倍推动格陵兰岛计划]

    在另一篇文章中,特朗普明确将查戈斯群岛争端与他对格陵兰岛的推动联系起来。

    “英国放弃极其重要的土地是极其愚蠢的行为,也是格陵兰岛必须被收购的众多国家安全原因之一,”特朗普写道。

    查戈斯群岛在英国非殖民化过程中与毛里求斯分离,国际法院2019年裁定此举非法。

    英国后来同意移交主权,同时将迪戈加西亚岛租回至少99年,每年租金至少1.6亿美元。

    迪戈加西亚岛是美军远程轰炸机、后勤和力量投送在中东、印度洋-太平洋地区和非洲的枢纽。约有2500名人员驻守,其中大部分是美国人。

    亨明斯解释道:”如果毛里求斯在获得法律控制权后将这些岛屿提供给中国,在国际舆论看来将给美国带来巨大压力。”

    “毕竟,一旦毛里求斯获得法律主权,它随时可以重新谈判租赁条款,甚至撕毁条约。”

    “这还可能向中国渔船队开放专属经济区,其丰富的渔场将给美国空军在该岛周围的行动增加另一重风险,”亨明斯说。

    “目前,美国在迪戈加西亚岛的基地被认为是安全的,毛里求斯向英国(并通过英国向美国)承诺了99年的租约,据信这不会干扰空军基地的运作。但细节决定成败。”

    福克斯新闻数字版已联系白宫寻求置评。

    艾玛·布西是福克斯新闻数字版的突发新闻撰稿人。加入福克斯之前,她曾在《每日电讯报》美国夜间团队工作,涉及外交、政治、新闻、体育和文化等多个部门。

    President Donald Trump dramatically reversed course Tuesday on a U.K. plan to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius while warning it could jeopardize U.S. access to the Diego Garcia military base.

    Trump’s reversal highlights what a defense expert called a “new Trump Doctrine” before linking the president’s opposition to the Chagos deal with his Greenland push and citing fears Mauritius could later back out.

    Writing on his Truth Social platform Tuesday, Trump called the U.K.’s Chagos decision “an act of great stupidity.”

    “Shockingly, our ‘brilliant’ NATO Ally, the United Kingdom, is currently planning to give away the Island of Diego Garcia, the site of a vital U.S. Military Base, to Mauritius, and to do so FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER,” Trump wrote. “There is no doubt that China and Russia have noticed this act of total weakness.”

    [TRUMP ISSUES STERN WARNING TO NATO AHEAD OF VANCE’S HIGH-STAKES GREENLAND MEETING]

    “Trump has done a 180, partly because of the U.K.’s support for Denmark’s sovereign claims over Greenland and partly because of a new strategy outlined by the White House,” John Hemmings, director of the National Security Center at the Henry Jackson Society, told Fox News Digital.

    “These moves are linked and part of a ‘new Trump Doctrine’” outlined in November’s National Security Strategy,” he explained.

    “Diego Garcia is a potential threat to Beijing’s strategy to control vital shipping lanes between the oil-rich Middle East and China’s industrial heartland,” he added, describing how “nearly 23.7 million barrels of oil transit the Indian Ocean every day, with the base being vital in any U.S.-China conflict over Taiwan.”

    [TRUMP TELLS DAVOS US ALONE CAN SECURE GREENLAND, INSISTS HE WON’T ‘USE FORCE’]

    In a separate post, Trump explicitly linked the Chagos dispute to his Greenland push.

    “The U.K. giving away extremely important land is an act of GREAT STUPIDITY, and is another in a very long line of national security reasons why Greenland has to be acquired,” Trump wrote.

    The Chagos Islands were separated from Mauritius during Britain’s decolonization process, a move the International Court of Justice ruled unlawful in 2019.

    The U.K. later agreed to transfer sovereignty while leasing Diego Garcia back for at least 99 years at a cost of at least $160 million annually.

    Diego Garcia is a hub for long-range bombers, logistics and power projection across the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific and Africa. Around 2,500 personnel, mostly American, are stationed there.

    [TRUMP DOUBLES DOWN ON GREENLAND PUSH AS POLLS SHOW LITTLE PUBLIC SUPPORT]

    “If Mauritius were to offer the islands to China after taking de jure control, it would put immense pressure on the U.S. in the eyes of international public opinion,” Hemmings explained.

    “After all, once Mauritius has de jure sovereignty, it can renegotiate the lease terms or even renege on the treaty at any time it wants.

    “It might also provide access to the exclusive economic zone, with all of its rich fishing grounds, to Chinese fishing fleets, adding another layer of risk to U.S. Air Force operations around the island,” Hemmings said.

    “At this moment, the U.S. base at Diego Garcia is thought to be secure, with Mauritius promising the U.K. (and by proxy, the U.S.) a 99-year lease, which will not, it is supposed, interfere with the operations of the air base at all. But the devil is in the details.”

    Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.

    Emma Bussey is a breaking news writer for Fox News Digital. Before joining Fox, she worked at The Telegraph with the U.S. overnight team, across desks including foreign, politics, news, sport and culture.

  • 特朗普最新的“塔可时刻”将其日益不稳定的性格置于聚光灯下

    分析:斯蒂芬·科林森

    更新于 2026年1月22日,美国东部时间上午8:18
    发布于 2026年1月21日,美国东部时间晚上8:07

    图片

    唐纳德·特朗普总统于2026年1月21日抵达苏黎世机场后走向“海军陆战队一号”直升机。
    Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

    唐纳德·特朗普 北约 关税

    唐纳德·特朗普总统在格陵兰岛问题上的退缩,标志着一位现代总统在世界舞台上经历的最反复无常的事件之一达到了顶峰。

    周三几个小时内,特朗普从要求对这个半自治丹麦领土拥有“权利、所有权和主权”,突然转变为庆祝一份关于其未来的“无限”、“永久”框架协议。

    这一“突破”似乎取决于北约额外驻军以确保北极安全——这其实是他本周混乱局势发生前就能通过正常途径获得的,只要他开口请求。

    总统周四告诉福克斯商业新闻频道,正在谈判的框架协议将给予美国“完全准入权”,对格陵兰岛没有时间限制,特别是用于他提议的“金色穹顶”导弹防御系统。这可能与华盛顿现有的与丹麦条约实质上并无太大不同。但关键在于,一份更新的协议能给总统一个可以载入史册的“遗产成就”。

    如果这一切的代价是与欧洲的关系严重受损,以及人们对他对北约防御承诺忠诚度的新质疑,那么对一个专注于个人目标的总统而言,这可能只是“做生意”的成本。

    无论如何粉饰太平,都没有迹象表明特朗普会从达沃斯世界经济论坛带回可以插上星条旗的广袤冰原的“地契”。北约秘书长马克·吕特在福克斯新闻上说,在与总统的会面中,丹麦对格陵兰岛的主权问题甚至没有被提及——这反而会巩固这位“特朗普密语者”的声誉。

    但瑞典副首相埃芭·布施警告称,这场风暴可能尚未结束。

    “今天的进展可能成为明天的麻烦,”布施在接受CNN的吉姆·西库托采访时表示,“现在还为时过早,无法确定这项协议的真正内容。”

    特朗普对盟友领导人连日来的侮辱引发了北约即将崩溃的担忧,随后上演了一系列荒诞场景。他最初拒绝排除派遣军队占领格陵兰岛(该岛已是北约成员国的领土)的可能性,这一行为仿佛出自一部糟糕的未来主义惊悚片。

    特朗普在华盛顿和瑞士多日的语无伦次、令人困惑的公开露面进一步混淆了问题。周三,他甚至把格陵兰岛和冰岛弄混了。

    他一直受一时兴起和社交媒体爆发的支配。但在摆脱他自己引发的危机时,特朗普暴露了围绕其日益不受欢迎的总统任期的另类事实现实。

    而特朗普两届任期以来最令人困惑的事件之一,将加深人们对其易变情绪在未来三年将把国家和世界带向何方的担忧。

    “我对特朗普总统和特朗普政府的信息是:是时候清醒过来,冷静下来了,”布施说。

    “我不会因为一条新推文就改变我的政策。”

    图片

    2026年1月20日,格陵兰岛努克上空出现北极光。
    Evgeniy Maloletka/AP

    两个相互矛盾的现实

    在保守派媒体中,特朗普再次被吹捧为一位“下一盘大棋”的战略大师,他采取强硬立场迫使软弱的欧洲人达成“协议”。这种说法认为,总统以威胁北约解体和毁灭性关税为手段,换取了惊人的让步。

    这很难让人信服,因为没有迹象表明欧洲向特朗普做出了任何实质性让步,也没有证据显示他真的获得了格陵兰岛的主权。无论如何,根据与丹麦现有的条约,美国长期以来一直有权派遣任何军事资产来加强这个世界最大岛屿的防御。

    在右翼圈子之外,特朗普在威胁欧洲国家除非割让格陵兰岛否则将对其征收关税后又突然放弃,这被嘲笑为又一个“特朗普总是临阵退缩”(TACO)的时刻。就像他之前“解放日”关税威胁一样,总统可能被自己行动的结果吓住了。

    总统甚至无法解释他声称达成的协议细节。当被CNN的凯特兰·柯林斯问及该协议是否意味着美国将拥有格陵兰岛时,他长时间沉默后坚称这是“最终的长期协议”,并将是“无限期”的。

    在接受CNBC采访时,特朗普在谈论与吕特会面后,用“协议的概念”来吹嘘,细节同样模糊不清。“这有点复杂,但我们会稍后解释,”总统说,但透露这是“永久”的,这显示出作为总司令,他对细节的理解几乎令人难以置信。

    前美国驻乌克兰大使威廉·泰勒告诉CNN的埃丽卡·希尔,特朗普说该协议会让所有人满意,这一点在某种程度上是对的。“这确实会让人们满意,因为我们可以不再谈论这个非问题。现在我们可以回到真正重要的事情上,也就是实现乌克兰的和平,”泰勒说。

    在瑞士达沃斯发生的周三令人晕头转向的事件,并非唯一引发对79岁总统心态以及其行为可能对美国国家利益造成长期损害担忧的争议。

    他提出的可能取代联合国的“和平委员会”计划也在达沃斯引起关注。希望获得永久席位的成员国需缴纳10亿美元的入会费,这让人联想到他私人俱乐部的会费,而非一个真正的国际外交机构。随后又有人透露,特朗普曾邀请俄罗斯总统弗拉基米尔·普京加入,尽管他在非法入侵乌克兰期间屠杀平民。“是的,我会在上面放一些有争议的人,但这些人能把事情做成,”特朗普说。

    和平委员会的“小字条款”凸显了这个想法的荒谬性。例如,它暗示总统即使卸任后,仍将继续管理这个俱乐部,指导全球外交。由于这一计划暗示联合国将被边缘化,几个美国盟友已与其保持距离。然而在特朗普看来,这是“有史以来最伟大的委员会”。

    图片

    2026年1月21日,在第56届世界经济论坛年会上,与会者聆听美国总统唐纳德·特朗普的讲话。
    Jonathan Ernst/Reuters

    特朗普领导下美国命运的新疑问

    从格陵兰岛风波中可以得出几个重要结论。

    首先,特朗普的外交政策行为正变得越来越自恋和不合逻辑。围绕格陵兰岛的奇怪转折可能会损害他精心塑造的“钢铁硬汉”形象,尤其是在特种部队突袭成功推翻委内瑞拉独裁者尼古拉斯·马杜罗之后。

    格陵兰危机主要由总统个人的执念驱动。他告诉《纽约时报》,拥有这个大岛对他而言“在心理上很重要”。他随后在给挪威首相的短信中暗示,他应该获得格陵兰岛作为“参与奖”,因为他没有获得诺贝尔和平奖。

    五角大楼从未透露过关于格陵兰岛的具体军事计划。但特朗普的反复无常和第二任期的好战意味着没有人能确定他的下一步行动。许多外部人士曾怀疑特朗普会对伊朗核项目采取行动,或者会驱逐委内瑞拉总统,但他冒险行动并为其威胁建立了可信度。

    特朗普对盟友领导人的怨恨也令人瞩目。最近几天,他猛烈抨击英国首相基尔·斯塔默、法国总统埃马纽埃尔·马克龙和瑞士——尽管他称赞瑞士的制表工艺。他向加拿大总理马克·卡尼发出了严厉警告,而卡尼一天前在演讲中警告称美国造成了国际体系的“裂痕”。

    “加拿大的生存依赖于美国,”特朗普说,“记住这一点,马克,下次你发表声明时。”

    不言而喻,这一切都不是正常的总统行为。

    特朗普还对他是否会在未获得格陵兰岛的情况下履行北约《北大西洋公约》第五条共同防御承诺提出了新的质疑。“他们有选择。你可以说‘是’,我们会非常感激;或者说‘不’,我们会记住,”特朗普在达沃斯演讲中表示。

    特朗普过去对北约成员国利用美国军事支持、削减自身国防预算的抱怨是合理的。但他最近几周的敌意可能进一步削弱了联盟。事实上,他的行为加剧了盟友们对西方联盟因美国领导不稳定而衰落的担忧。

    尽管如此,特朗普最终还是退缩了。

    在他周末威胁要对欧洲国家加征关税以换取格陵兰岛后,原本一路飙升的个人退休账户(401k)遭遇股市暴跌——他将其视为自己经济表现的晴雨表。当他收回关税威胁时,全球股市反弹。当不可避免的下一场争议出现时,欧洲可能再次愿意威胁动员其贸易力量来安抚这个“美国霸王”——尤其是在中期选举年,美国选民对新的经济动荡更加敏感。

    对欧洲而言,这一事件的教训是,通过团结起来对抗特朗普,他们似乎迫使他退缩。在此之前,只有中国通过使用稀土“王牌”冻结了他的贸易战,才成功阻止了他。

    此前,欧洲领导人通过奉承和屈服于特朗普以避免其愤怒,这是多么的失败。他对英国关于格陵兰岛的关税威胁表明,去年的皇家访问可能暂时触动了总统的心弦,但并未留下任何善意的余波。

    与此同时,欧洲国家对丹麦的支持,成为卡尼在达沃斯呼吁“中等强国”团结起来的范例,这一演讲可能被铭记为西方后美国时代的第一个可信蓝图。

    但这不会是白宫决心以实力和武力统治而引发的最后一次对抗。

    尽管如此,在特朗普退缩后,北约内部冲突的可能性已有所降低。他可以在他声称已经结束的战争名单上再添一笔。

    本文已更新以增加更多信息。

    唐纳德·特朗普 北约 关税

    Trump’s latest TACO moment puts his increasingly erratic temperament in the spotlight

    Analysis by Stephen Collinson
    Updated Jan 22, 2026, 8:18 AM ET
    PUBLISHED Jan 21, 2026, 8:07 PM ET

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/gettyimages-2257392972.jpg

    President Donald Trump walks toward Marine One after arriving at Zurich Airport on January 21, 2026.

    Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

    Donald Trump NATO Tariffs

    President Donald Trump’s climbdown on Greenland capped one of the most erratic episodes involving a modern president on the world stage.

    Within hours Wednesday, Trump flipped from demanding “right, title, and ownership” of the semiautonomous Danish territory to celebrating an “infinite,” “forever” framework deal over its future.

    The breakthrough seems to hinge on extra NATO forces to secure the Arctic — something he could have got before his week of mayhem — if only he’d asked.

    The president told Fox Business on Thursday that the framework deal under negotiation would give the US “total access” with no time limit to Greenland for the United States, especially for his proposed Golden Dome missile defense system. This may turn out not to differ substantially from Washington’s existing treaty with Denmark. But crucially, an updated deal would give the president a legacy achievement to sign into history.

    If the cost of all this is badly damaged relations with Europe and new questions about his fealty to NATO defense guarantees, then that may simply be the cost of doing business for a president fixated on personal goals.

    And whatever the face-saving spin, there’s no sign Trump will return home from the World Economic Forum in Davos with the deeds to a vast, icy land on which he can plant the Stars and Stripes. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said on Fox News that the question of Danish sovereignty over Greenland didn’t even come up during a meeting with the president that will bolster the smooth Dutchman’s reputation as a “Trump whisperer.”

    But Sweden’s Deputy Prime Minister Ebba Busch warned the storm may not yet be over.

    “Today’s progress might be tomorrow’s headache,” Busch told CNN’s Jim Sciutto on “The Brief.” “It’s still too soon to tell what this deal really entails.”

    Farcical scenes unfolded after Trump flung days of insults at allied leaders, raising fears that NATO was about to implode. His initial refusal to rule out sending troops to take Greenland — which is already alliance territory — seemed torn from a bad futuristic thriller.

    Trump further confused the issue with several days of rambling and baffling public appearances in Washington and Switzerland. On Wednesday, he even got Greenland and Iceland confused.

    He’s always governed by whim and social media outbursts. But in extricating himself from a crisis that he triggered, Trump laid bare the alternative factual reality that surrounds his increasingly unpopular presidency.

    And one of the most perplexing episodes so far of Trump’s two terms will deepen concern about where his volatile moods will lead the nation and the world in the next three years.

    “My message to President Trump and the Trump administration is: It’s time to come to your senses and calm down,” Busch said.

    “I’m not going to change my policy tomorrow in a new tweet.”

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/ap26021074390141.jpg

    The northern lights are seen in the sky above Nuuk, Greenland, on January 20, 2026.

    Evgeniy Maloletka/AP

    Two dueling realities


    On conservative media, Trump was again being lionized as the master strategist playing 4-D chess who staked out a maximalist position to pressure feckless Europeans into a “deal.” This line of argument relies on the belief that the president threatened Europe with the implicit breakup of NATO and devastating tariffs, thereby securing stunning concessions.

    This is hard to take seriously because there is no sign Europe gave Trump anything, nor that he secured Greenland as an addition to US territory as he demanded. In any case, under existing treaties with Denmark, Washington has long had the capacity and right to send any military assets that it wants to reinforce the world’s largest island.

    Outside the right-wing bubble, Trump is being mocked for another “TACO” (“Trump always chickens out”) moment after dropping the threat of tariffs on European nations until they agreed to give him Greenland. Just as with his “Liberation Day” tariffs, the president may have been spooked by the result of his own actions.

    The president couldn’t even explain the deal he claimed to have clinched. When he was asked by CNN’s Kaitlan Collins whether the agreement meant the US would own Greenland, there was a prolonged pause before he insisted it was the “ultimate, long term deal” and would be “infinite.”

    In an interview on CNBC, the details were equally foggy as Trump boasted about “the concept of a deal” after talking to Rutte. “It’s a little bit complex, but we will explain it down the line,” the president said, but revealed that this was for “forever,” showing a barely believable lack of grasp of detail for a commander-in-chief.

    Former US Ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor told CNN’s Erica Hill that Trump was right in one sense when he said the proposed deal would make everybody happy. “It does make people happy because we can get off talking about this non-problem. Now we can get back to what really matters and that is getting peace in Ukraine,” Taylor said.

    Wednesday’s head spinning events in Davos, Switzerland, were not the only controversy raising concerns about the 79-year-old president’s mindset and the long-term damage that his behavior may wreak on US national interests.

    His plans for a Board of Peace that he said might replace the United Nations also came into focus in Davos. The $1 billion joining fee for member states who want permanent membership recalled the dues at one of his private clubs more than a bona fide international diplomatic institution. Then it emerged that Trump had asked Russian President Vladimir Putin to join, despite his butchering of civilians during his illegal invasion of Ukraine. “Yeah, I have some controversial people on it, but these are people that get the job done,” Trump said.

    The small print for the peace board underscores the absurdity of the idea. It implies, for instance, that the president would continue to run the club, directing global diplomacy, even after he’s left the White House. Several US allies have distanced themselves from the plan since it implies the eclipsing of the United Nations. Yet in Trump’s mind, it’s “the greatest board ever assembled.”

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/2026-01-21t145034z-1416860736-rc2q5jaqq6gn-rtrmadp-3-davos-meeting-trump.jpg

    Attendees listen to President Donald Trump’s remarks during the 56th annual World Economic Forum in Davos on January 21, 2026.

    Jonathan Ernst/Reuters

    New questions raised over America’s destiny under Trump


    There are several significant takeaways from the Greenland storm.

    The first is that Trump’s conduct of foreign policy is becoming ever more narcissistic and illogical. The odd twists and turns over Greenland may tarnish the image of a steely commander in chief he’s cultivated, in particular after a special forces raid that extracted Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.

    The Greenland crisis was largely driven by a personal presidential obsession. He told the New York Times that owning the vast island was “psychologically important for me.” He then implied in a text message to Norway’s prime minister that he was owed Greenland as a sort of participation trophy since he was not awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

    The Pentagon never revealed tangible plans to move on Greenland. But Trump’s tempestuousness and second-term belligerence mean no one could be sure. Many outsiders doubted that Trump would strike Iran’s nuclear program last year or that he would oust Venezuela’s president — but he took on the risks and built credibility for his threats.

    Trump’s bitterness towards allied leaders was also remarkable. In recent days, he’s savaged British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron and Switzerland — although he praised its prowess in watchmaking. He delivered a dark warning to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who a day earlier had warned in a speech that the US had caused a “rupture” in the international system.

    “Canada lives because of the United States,” Trump said. “Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements.”

    It goes without saying that none of this is normal presidential behavior.

    Trump also raised fresh doubts about whether he’d honor NATO’s Article 5 mutual defense guarantee if he didn’t get Greenland. “They have a choice. You can say ‘yes’, and we will be very appreciative, or you can say ‘no’, and we will remember,” Trump said in his Davos speech.

    Trump has been justified in his past complaints that NATO members were taking advantage of US military support by tanking their own defense budgets. But his antipathy in recent weeks may have further weakened the alliance. In fact, he’s justified the growing understanding among fellow alliance members that the Western alliance is waning because of unstable American leadership.

    Still, Trump did ultimately back down.

    Following his weekend threat to tariff European states into handing over Greenland, a stock slump hit the previously soaring 401k accounts which he uses as a barometer of his economic performance. Global stocks bounced back when he walked back his tariff threats. When the inevitable next controversy emerges, Europe may again be willing to threaten to mobilize its trading might to calm the American bully — especially in a midterm election year when US voters are already hypersensitive to new economic upsets.

    For Europe, one lesson from this saga will be that by standing together and standing up to Trump they appear to have forced him to back down. Before now, only China among foreign nations had halted him in his tracks by using its rare earths trump card to ice his trade war.

    Previously, European leaders flattered and genuflected to Trump to avoid his wrath. What a failure. His tariff threat to Britain over Greenland showed that last year’s royal visit might have touched the president’s heart in the moment, but it left no half-life of goodwill.

    European solidarity behind Denmark, meanwhile, was an object lesson of Carney’s call in Davos for “middle powers” to stick together, in a speech likely to be remembered as the first credible blueprint for the West’s post-American era.

    But this will not be the last confrontation stirred by the White House’s determination to rule by strength and force.

    Still, after Trump backed down, the idea of NATO-on-NATO conflict has receded. He can add another data point to the ever-lengthening list of wars he claims to have ended.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    Donald Trump NATO Tariffs

  • 北约秘书长马克·吕特在《特别报道》中阐述特朗普总统宣布的格陵兰“框架”

    特朗普总统宣布与北约秘书长马克·吕特达成格陵兰新“框架”后,这位北约最高负责人在接受福克斯新闻《与布雷特·拜尔的特别报道》采访时表示,他与特朗普在瑞士举行的世界经济论坛会议期间并未讨论美国强行从丹麦控制格陵兰的问题。

    吕特在被追问据称已达成的“框架”协议细节时表示:“在我与总统先生的交谈中,这个问题不再被提及。他非常专注于我们需要做什么来确保那个巨大的北极地区(目前正发生变化,中俄在其中的活动日益增多)得到有效保护。”

    特朗普称,该协议导致他决定不实施原定于2月1日生效的关税。

    吕特坚持道:“这确实是我们讨论的重点。”

    本周在世界经济论坛期间,特朗普在其社交媒体平台“真实社交”上宣布了格陵兰新“框架”。

    总统在帖子中写道:“基于我与北约秘书长马克·吕特举行的富有成效的会议,我们已就格陵兰以及整个北极地区的未来协议框架达成共识。基于这一理解,我将不实施原定于2月1日生效的关税。目前正在就格陵兰‘金穹’(The Golden Dome)相关事宜进行进一步讨论,讨论进展将及时公布。”

    特朗普指出,副总统JD·万斯、国务卿马科·鲁比奥和特使史蒂夫·维特科夫将领导“谈判”并直接向他汇报。

    特朗普今早早些时候在世界经济论坛上表示:“除非我决定采取极端强硬手段(届时我们将势不可挡),否则我们可能一无所获。但我不会这么做。现在大家都说‘哦,太好了’。这可能是我发表的最重要声明,因为人们以为我会使用武力。我不必使用武力,我不想使用武力,我不会使用武力。”

    在接受福克斯新闻独家采访时,吕特称特朗普关于需要加强北极地区安全的表态“完全正确”,并指出俄罗斯或中国在该地区构成威胁的可能性正逐日增加。北约秘书长还赞扬特朗普领导北约其他成员国提高国防开支。

    吕特坚持道:“今晚在这个节目中我要强调,正是他(指特朗普)推动整个欧洲和加拿大将国防开支提高到了著名的2%,这对我们平衡国防开支并保护自身安全至关重要。而这正是他帖子中提到的我们将共同推进的框架。”

    吕特还指出,北约成员国与俄罗斯、中国之间日益增加的紧张局势凸显了加强北极地区安全的必要性。

    当被问及他是否认为其他国家与中俄的关系处理方式与过去不同时,吕特回应道:“我不应评论个别盟友与中国的具体关系,这不是我的职责。作为北约,我们的集体立场是:我们不能天真。我可以告诉你们,中国在军事上的巨额投入将带来隐患,他们绝非只是在北京组织阅兵,俄罗斯的军队也不是只在莫斯科搞庆典,这些军事力量的存在都是为了实际使用。”

    NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte expounds on the Greenland ‘framework’ announced by President Donald Trump on ‘Special Report.’

    After President Donald Trump announced a new Greenland “framework” had been agreed upon with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, the NATO chief told Fox News’ “Special Report with Bret Baier” the U.S. forcibly taking control of Greenland from Denmark was not discussed during meetings between him and Trump in Switzerland during the World Economic Forum.

    “That issue did not come up anymore in my conversations with Mr. President. He’s very much focused on what we need to do to make sure that that huge Arctic region, where change is taking place at the moment, where the Chinese and Russians are more and more active, how we can protect that,” Rutte said when pressed on the details of the reported “framework” that has been agreed upon.

    Trump said the agreement resulted in his decision not to impose tariffs scheduled to go into effect Feb. 1.

    “That was really the focus of our discussions,” Rutte insisted.

    Trump announced the new “framework” for Greenland in a post on his social media site Truth Social Wednesday afternoon while at the World Economic Forum this week.

    “Based upon a very productive meeting that I have had with the Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, we have formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region,” the president wrote. “Based upon this understanding, I will not be imposing the Tariffs that were scheduled to go into effect on February 1st. Additional discussions are being held concerning The Golden Dome as it pertains to Greenland. Further information will be made available as discussions progress.”

    Trump noted that Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff will lead “the negotiations” and report directly to him.

    “We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won’t do that,” Trump said earlier in the morning at the World Economic Forum. “Now everyone’s saying, ‘Oh, good.’ That’s probably the biggest statement I made because people thought I would use force. I don’t have to use force. I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force.”

    During the exclusive interview with Fox News, Rutte called Trump “totally right” about needing to shore up security in the Arctic region, noting that the chance of Russia or China becoming a threat in that region is increasing every day. The NATO Secretary General also praised Trump’s leadership in getting other NATO countries to pay more money for the alliance’s defenses.

    “I would argue tonight with you on this program he was the one who brought a whole of Europe and Canada up to this famous 5%,” Rutte insisted, “which is crucial for us to equalize our spending, but also protect ourselves. And this is the framework which you see in his post that we will work on.”

    Rutte also noted that increased volatility between NATO-aligned countries, Russia and China underscored the need to shore up security in the Arctic region.

    The NATO chief was asked whether he thought other countries were dealing with the Russians and the Chinese differently than they have in the past.

    “It’s not up to me to comment on what individual allies are doing in terms of their relationship with China,” Rutte responded. “I think collectively, as NATO, we have a position. The position is that we should not be naive. I can tell you’ll regret these huge investments the Chinese are making in the military. They are not there to organize parades in Beijing, and the military in Russia are not there to organize parades in Moscow. They are there to be used.”

  • 法官下令重绘纽约州国会选区,共和党或因此失去关键席位

    2026-01-21T23:08:55.761Z / CNN

    作者:美联社

    [图片链接]

    2025年6月,来自纽约的共和党众议员妮可·马利奥塔基斯在美国国会大厦。

    >

    Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg/Getty Images/File

    纽约州奥尔巴尼 AP电—

    周三,一名法官推翻了纽约市唯一由共和党人代表的国会选区的边界划分,下令该州重新绘制选区地图,理由是当前的选区构成违宪地削弱了黑人和西班牙裔居民的投票权。

    共和党人预计将对这一裁决提起上诉,随着全国范围内的选区操纵(gerrymandering)之争出现新战线,两党正为争夺美国众议院控制权而展开激烈角逐。

    自唐纳德·特朗普总统推动共和党制定新的国会选区划分方案以帮助其政党在今年中期选举中保住微弱的众议院多数席位以来,约三分之一的州已考虑重新划分其众议院选区。民主党则发起了自己的重新划分选区行动,尽管他们有时会受到自己通过的旨在防止党派操纵选区的法律的阻碍。

    在纽约州,法官杰弗里·珀尔曼(Jeffrey Pearlman)为民主党人在这场斗争中赢得了先机,裁定共和党众议员妮可·马利奥塔基斯代表的布鲁克林南部和史泰登岛选区应重新调整。

    这起诉讼由一家与民主党结盟的选举法公司提起,该公司认为,当前的选区边界划分没有考虑到史泰登岛黑人和拉丁裔居民数量的增加,从而削弱了他们的投票权。

    共和党人抨击这起诉讼是为民主党操纵选区、铲除该州为数不多的剩余共和党人选区的明显企图。

    马利奥塔基斯在一份声明中表示:“这是华盛顿民主党人企图从民众手中窃取这个国会席位的荒谬尝试,我们非常有信心最终会胜诉。”

    民主党州长凯茜·霍楚尔(Kathy Hochul)曾誓言要介入全国性的选区重新划分之争,但在选举前几乎没有立法途径可以实质性改变该州的国会选区划分。

    该州当前的选区地图由州立法机构的民主党人绘制,并由州长签署成为法律,旨在在2024年选举前帮助民主党在几个关键摇摆选区获得优势。根据该地图,民主党在纽约州获得了几个席位,但共和党最终赢得了众议院多数席位。

    Judge orders redrawing of a NYC congressional district, potentially costing Republicans a key seat

    2026-01-21T23:08:55.761Z / CNN

    By Associated Press

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/gettyimages-2221577756.jpg

    Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, a Republican from New York, at the US Capitol in June 2025.

    Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg/Getty Images/File

    Albany, New York AP—

    A judge on Wednesday threw out the boundaries of the only congressional seat in New York City represented by a Republican, ordering the state to redraw the district on the grounds that its current composition unconstitutionally diluted the votes of Black and Hispanic residents.

    Republicans are expected to appeal the decision, as a new front opens in a national gerrymandering battle that has both political parties jockeying for advantage in the fight over control of the US House.

    About a third of states have considered redrawing their House districts since President Donald Trump began pushing for Republicans to craft new congressional lines to help his party hold onto its narrow House majority in this year’s midterms. Democrats countered by launching their own redistricting efforts, though they have sometimes been hampered by laws they passed intended to prevent partisan gerrymandering.

    In New York, Judge Jeffrey Pearlman handed Democrats an early win in the fight, ruling that a district held by Republican US Rep. Nicole Malliotakis in southern Brooklyn and Staten Island should be reconfigured.

    The case, filed by an election law firm aligned with the Democratic Party, argued the current lines of the district were drawn without accounting for a rise in Staten Island’s Black and Latino residents, thereby diluting their voting power.

    Republicans had bashed the lawsuit as a clear effort to game the district to help Democrats and eliminate one of the few remaining GOP districts in the state.

    In a statement, Malliotakis said, “This is a frivolous attempt by Washington Democrats to steal this congressional seat from the people and we are very confident that we will prevail at the end of the day.”

    Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, had vowed to wade into the national redistricting fight but had few legislative avenues to substantially change the state’s congressional lines before the election.

    The state’s current map was drawn by Democrats in the state Legislature and signed into law by the governor, designed to give their party a boost in a few battleground districts ahead of the 2024 elections. Democrats picked up a few seats in New York under that map, though Republicans eventually won a House majority.

  • 新闻

    请提供需要翻译的英文新闻文章,我将按照您的要求进行高质量的简体中文翻译。

    No English content available

  • ICE官员称拥有无需法官令状即可强行入户的广泛权力,备忘录显示

    作者:美联社
    更新时间:5小时前
    最后更新:2026年1月22日,美国东部时间凌晨2:57
    发布时间:2026年1月21日,美国东部时间下午5:55

    根据美联社获取的美国移民与海关执法局(ICE)内部备忘录,联邦移民官员正主张无需法官令状即可强行入户的广泛权力,这标志着长期以来旨在尊重宪法对政府搜查限制的指导方针发生重大逆转。

    该备忘录授权ICE官员仅依据更窄范围的行政令状,即可使用武力进入住宅逮捕已收到最终驱逐令的人员。倡导者称此举违反第四修正案保护,颠覆了多年来向移民社区提供的建议。

    这一转变正值特朗普政府在全国范围内大幅扩大移民逮捕行动,数千名官员被部署开展大规模驱逐运动,已在明尼阿波利斯等城市重塑执法策略。

    广告反馈

    国会民主党人立即对ICE的指令发出警告。参议员理查德·布卢门撒尔周三呼吁国土安全部部长克里斯蒂·诺姆和代理ICE主任托德·莱昂斯就该备忘录在国会作证。

    布卢门撒尔向参议院国土安全委员会和司法委员会主席致信,要求在”令人震惊的匿名举报人披露”后”立即”传唤证人。

    这位康涅狄格州参议员周三还向诺姆和莱昂斯发送了另一封信,称该备忘录声称移民官员拥有这些广泛权力,应”令所有美国人震惊”。

    “每个美国人都应该对这项秘密ICE政策感到恐惧,该政策授权其特工破门而入并突袭您的家。这是一项在法律和道德上都令人憎恶的政策,体现了美国正在实时见证的那种危险、可耻的滥用行为,”布卢门撒尔在新闻稿中表示。

    明尼苏达州民主党州长蒂姆·瓦尔兹称该备忘录是”对自由和隐私的攻击”。

    多年来,移民权益倡导者、法律援助组织和地方政府一直敦促人们除非移民官员出示法官签署的令状,否则不要开门。这一指导方针基于最高法院裁决,通常禁止执法部门未经司法批准进入住宅。在政府加强移民打击行动、逮捕加速之际,ICE的新指令直接削弱了这一建议。

    (图片链接:https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/gettyimages-2256434316.jpg)

    根据举报人投诉,该备忘录本身并未在机构内广泛分享,但内容已被用于培训新ICE官员,这些官员正被部署到城镇实施总统的移民打击行动。举报人披露,新雇佣的ICE人员和仍在培训中的人员被要求遵循备忘录指导,而非实际与之冲突的书面培训材料。

    目前尚不清楚该指令在移民执法行动中应用范围有多广。美联社目睹ICE官员1月11日仅持行政令状,身着重型战术装备、持枪闯入明尼阿波利斯一名利比里亚男子家中,使用武力破门而入。

    这一变化几乎肯定会面临法律挑战,并受到倡导组织以及移民友好型州和地方政府的强烈批评,这些政府多年来一直成功敦促民众除非ICE出示法官签署的令状否则不要开门。

    美联社从国会一名官员处获取了该备忘录和举报人投诉,该官员匿名分享以讨论敏感文件。美联社核实了投诉中陈述的真实性。

    备忘录由ICE代理主任托德·莱昂斯签署,日期为2025年5月12日,内容称:”尽管美国国土安全部(DHS)历史上并不依赖行政令状单独逮捕收到最终驱逐令的外国人,但司法部总法律顾问办公室最近裁定,美国宪法、《移民与国籍法》和移民条例并未禁止为此目的使用行政令状。”

    该备忘录未详细说明这一裁定是如何做出的,以及可能产生的法律后果。

    当被问及该备忘录时,国土安全部发言人特里西亚·麦克劳克林在给美联社的电子邮件声明中表示,所有持行政令状服务的人员”已享有充分正当程序和最终驱逐令”。

    她说,签发这些令状的官员也已认定有合理理由逮捕该人。她表示最高法院和国会”已认可移民执法案件中行政令状的适当性”,但未详细说明。麦克劳克林未回应关于ICE官员自备忘录发布以来是否仅持行政令状进入私人住宅,以及频率如何的问题。

    近期逮捕行动凸显执法策略变化


    协助员工揭露不当行为的非营利法律组织”举报人援助”在致美联社的举报人投诉中表示,该组织代表两名匿名美国政府官员披露”一项秘密且看似违宪的政策指令”。

    近期一系列备受关注的逮捕行动(许多发生在私人住宅和企业,并被视频记录)凸显了移民逮捕策略,包括官员如何使用适当令状。

    大多数移民逮捕依据行政令状进行,这是移民当局签发的内部文件,仅授权逮捕特定个人,除非获得同意,否则不允许官员强行进入私人住宅或其他非公共空间。只有法官签署的令状才具备这种权限。

    所有执法行动(包括ICE和海关与边境保护局开展的行动)均受宪法第四修正案约束,该修正案保护该国所有公民免受不合理搜查和扣押。

    (图片链接:https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/gettyimages-2255776689.jpg)

    如果移民官员仅持行政令状,人们可依法拒绝其进入私人财产,除非存在有限例外情况。

    本月联邦特工强行闯入明尼阿波利斯一名2023年收到驱逐令的利比里亚男子家中,将其逮捕。美联社审查的文件显示,特工仅持行政令状——这意味着没有法官批准对私人财产的突袭。

    备忘录仅向”特定”官员展示


    备忘录称,ICE官员仅需持签署的行政令状(I-205),即可强行进入住宅逮捕收到移民法官、移民上诉委员会或地方法官或治安法官签发的最终驱逐令的移民。

    备忘录规定,官员必须先敲门表明身份和来意,进入时间限制在早上6点至晚上10点之间,必须给屋内人员”合理机会合法行动”。但如果不起作用,可使用武力进入。

    “如外国人拒绝准入,ICE官员应仅使用必要且合理的武力进入外国人住所,同时适当告知官员或特工的身份和进入意图,”备忘录称。

    该备忘录面向所有ICE人员,但仅向”特定DHS官员”展示,这些官员随后与部分员工分享,要求阅读后归还。举报人援助在披露中写道。

    其中一名举报人仅在主管在场时被允许查看备忘录,之后必须归还,且不允许做笔记。举报人援助称,有一名举报人能够获取该文件并合法向国会披露。

    尽管备忘录于5月发布,但举报人援助高级副总裁兼特别法律顾问大卫·克利格曼表示,其客户花了时间才找到”安全合法的途径向立法者和美国公众披露”。

    ICE官员被要求仅依赖行政令状


    ICE正在快速招聘数千名新驱逐官员以执行总统大规模驱逐议程,他们在佐治亚州布伦瑞克的联邦执法培训中心接受培训。

    美联社8月访问该中心时,ICE官员多次表示新官员接受第四修正案培训。

    但根据举报人说法,新雇佣的ICE官员被要求仅依赖行政令状进入住宅逮捕,这与书面国土安全部培训材料相冲突。

    ICE官员通常会等待数小时,希望被逮捕者走出屋外,以便在人行道或工作场所(公共空间)逮捕,避免侵犯第四修正案权利。

    举报人援助称新政策”完全违反法律”,并削弱了”第四修正案及其保护的权利”。

    CNN记者阿莱娜·法亚兹对此报道有贡献。

    ICE officers assert sweeping power to enter homes without a judge’s warrant, memo says

    By Associated Press
    Updated 5 hr ago
    Updated Jan 22, 2026, 2:57 AM ET
    PUBLISHED Jan 21, 2026, 5:55 PM ET

    Federal immigration officers are asserting sweeping power to forcibly enter people’s homes without a judge’s warrant, according to an internal Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo obtained by The Associated Press, marking a sharp reversal of longstanding guidance meant to respect constitutional limits on government searches.

    The memo authorizes ICE officers to use force to enter a residence based solely on a more narrow administrative warrant to arrest someone with a final order of removal, a move that advocates say collides with Fourth Amendment protections and upends years of advice given to immigrant communities.

    The shift comes as the Trump administration dramatically expands immigration arrests nationwide, deploying thousands of officers under a mass deportation campaign that is already reshaping enforcement tactics in cities such as Minneapolis.

    Ad Feedback

    Democrats on Capitol Hill immediately began sounding the alarm over the ICE directive. Sen. Richard Blumenthal on Wednesday called for Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and acting ICE Director Todd Lyons to testify before Congress about the memo.

    Blumenthal sent a letter to the chairs of the Senate Homeland Security Committee and the Judiciary Committee asking them to “immediately” call for the testimony following “a shocking anonymous whistleblower disclosure.”

    The Connecticut senator also sent a letter Wednesday to Noem and Lyons, writing that the memo, asserting that immigration officers have these sweeping powers, should “appall every American.”

    “Every American should be terrified by this secret ICE policy authorizing its agents to kick down your door and storm into your home. It is a legally and morally abhorrent policy that exemplifies the kinds of dangerous, disgraceful abuses America is seeing in real time,” Blumenthal said in a news release.

    Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz called the memo an “assault on freedom and privacy.”

    For years, immigrant advocates, legal aid groups and local governments have urged people not to open their doors to immigration agents unless they are shown a warrant signed by a judge. That guidance is rooted in Supreme Court rulings that generally prohibit law enforcement from entering a home without judicial approval. The ICE directive directly undercuts that advice at a time when arrests are accelerating under the administration’s immigration crackdown.

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/gettyimages-2256434316.jpg

    The memo itself has not been widely shared within the agency, according to a whistleblower complaint, but its contents have been used to train new ICE officers who are being deployed into cities and towns to implement the president’s immigration crackdown. New ICE hires and those still in training are being told to follow the memo’s guidance instead of written training materials that actually contradict the memo, according to the whistleblower disclosure.

    It is unclear how broadly the directive has been applied in immigration enforcement operations. The Associated Press witnessed ICE officers ramming through the front door of the home of a Liberian man in Minneapolis on January 11 with only an administrative warrant, wearing heavy tactical gear and with their rifles drawn.

    The change is almost certain to meet legal challenges and stiff criticism from advocacy groups and immigrant-friendly state and local governments that have spent years successfully urging people not to open their doors unless ICE shows them a warrant signed by a judge.

    The Associated Press obtained the memo and whistleblower complaint from an official in Congress, who shared it on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive documents. The AP verified the authenticity of the accounts in the complaint.

    The memo, signed by the acting director of ICE, Todd Lyons, and dated May 12, 2025, says: “Although the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has not historically relied on administrative warrants alone to arrest aliens subject to final orders of removal in their place of residence, the DHS Office of the General Counsel has recently determined that the U.S. Constitution, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the immigration regulations do not prohibit relying on administrative warrants for this purpose.”

    The memo does not detail how that determination was made nor what its legal repercussions might be.

    When asked about the memo, Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said in an emailed statement to the AP that everyone the department serves with an administrative warrant has already had “full due process and a final order of removal.”

    She said the officers issuing those warrants have also found probable cause for the person’s arrest. She said the Supreme Court and Congress have “recognized the propriety of administrative warrants in cases of immigration enforcement,” without elaborating. McLaughlin did not respond to questions about whether ICE officers entered a person’s home since the memo was issued relying solely on an administrative warrant and if so, how often.

    Recent arrests shine a light on tactics


    Whistleblower Aid, a non-profit legal organization that assists workers exposing wrongdoings, said in the whistleblower complaint obtained by The Associated Press that it represents two anonymous US government officials “disclosing a secretive – and seemingly unconstitutional – policy directive.”

    A wave of recent high-profile arrests, many unfolding at private homes and businesses and captured on video, has shined a spotlight on immigration arrest tactics, including officers’ use of proper warrants.

    Most immigration arrests are carried out under administrative warrants, internal documents issued by immigration authorities that authorize the arrest of a specific individual but do not permit officers to forcibly enter private homes or other non-public spaces without consent. Only warrants signed by judges carry that authority.

    All law enforcement operations — including those conducted by ICE and Customs and Border Protection — are governed by the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, which protects all people in the country from unreasonable searches and seizures.

    https://news-multimedia-1393112320.cos.ap-guangzhou.myqcloud.com/gettyimages-2255776689.jpg

    People can legally refuse federal immigration agents entry into private property if the agents only have an administrative warrant, with some limited exceptions.

    Federal agents this month rammed the door of the Minneapolis home of a Liberian man with a deportation order from 2023, who was then arrested. Documents reviewed by The AP revealed that the agents only had an administrative warrant — meaning there was no judge who authorized the raid on private property.

    Memo shown to ‘select’ officials


    The memo says ICE officers can forcibly enter homes and arrest immigrants using just a signed administrative warrant known as an I-205 if they have a final order of removal issued by an immigration judge, the Board of Immigration Appeals or a district judge or magistrate judge.

    The memo says officers must first knock on the door and share who they are and why they’re at the residence. They’re limited in the hours they can go into the home — after 6 a.m. and before 10 p.m. The people inside must be given a “reasonable chance to act lawfully.” But if that doesn’t work, the memo says, they can use force to go in.

    “Should the alien refuse admittance, ICE officers and agents should use only a necessary and reasonable amount of force to enter the alien’s residence, following proper notification of the officer or agent’s authority and intent to enter,” the memo reads.

    The memo is addressed to all ICE personnel. But it has been shown only to “select DHS officials” who then shared it with some employees who were told to read it and return it, Whistleblower Aid wrote in the disclosure.

    One of the two whistleblowers was allowed to view the memo only in the presence of a supervisor and then had to give it back. That person was not allowed to take notes. A whistleblower was able to access the document and lawfully disclose to Congress, Whistleblower Aid said.

    Although the memo was issued in May, David Kligerman, senior vice president and special counsel at Whistleblower Aid, said it took time for its clients to find a “safe and legal path to disclose it to lawmakers and the American people.”

    ICE officers are told to rely solely on administrative warrants, memo says


    ICE has been rapidly hiring thousands of new deportation officers to carry out the president’s mass deportation agenda. They’re trained at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Brunswick, Georgia.

    During a visit there by The Associated Press in August, ICE officials said repeatedly that new officers were being trained to follow the Fourth Amendment.

    But according to the whistleblowers’ account, newly hired ICE officers are being told they can rely solely on administrative warrants to enter homes to make arrests even though that conflicts with written Homeland Security training materials.

    ICE officers often wait for hours for the person they’re hoping to arrest to come outside so they can make the arrest on the sidewalk or at the person’s work — public places where they are allowed to operate without the risk of infringing on the person’s Fourth Amendment rights.

    Whistleblower Aid called the new policy a “complete break from the law” and said it undercuts the “Fourth Amendment and the rights it protects.”

    CNN’s Aleena Fayaz contributed to this report.

  • 卡塔尔捐赠的飞机或于今夏开始服役,成为特朗普的新“空军一号”,空军表示

    2026年1月22日 / 美国东部时间凌晨12:20 / CBS新闻

    美国总统特朗普最早可能于今年夏天开始乘坐卡塔尔捐赠的飞机,美国空军证实将在数月内交付这架翻新的大型喷气式飞机,用作“空军一号”。

    “空军仍致力于加快交付VC-25备用飞机,以支持总统空运任务,预计不迟于2026年夏季交付。”空军发言人周三表示,证实了《华尔街日报》的一则报道。

    卡塔尔王室去年春天捐赠了这架波音747风格的飞机供特朗普先生使用。不过,这架飞机无法立即投入使用,因为五角大楼需要对其进行改装,使其能作为“空军一号”服役。当时一位消息人士告诉CBS新闻,在验收前,还需要检查是否装有安全和间谍设备。

    这架捐赠的飞机可能会取代目前服役的两架已有35年历史的“空军一号”飞机。特朗普长期以来一直推动更换这些老旧飞机,但更换项目面临延误,目前两架新飞机的交付时间定为2027年和2028年。

    这两架现有飞机在周二深夜显现出老化迹象:“空军一号”起飞不到一小时后,因“轻微电气问题”掉头返航。总统随后换乘一架较小的飞机,然后才飞往大西洋对岸参加世界经济论坛。

    在此次波折过程中,白宫新闻秘书卡罗琳·利维特曾开玩笑说,卡塔尔捐赠的飞机听起来“好多了”。

    这一捐赠遭到国会民主党人和监督组织的批评,他们认为总统接受外国价值数亿美元的礼物存在道德问题。一些批评者还质疑改装这架捐赠飞机的成本。

    “纳税人现在正资助第五架‘空军一号’,而这架飞机源自一个外国君主制国家,这是对公众信任、财政优先事项和国家安全利益的惊人滥用。”民主捍卫基金(Democracy Defenders Fund)伦理与反腐败首席法律顾问弗吉尼亚·坎特(Virginia Canter)表示。该基金由奥巴马政府时期的一位伦理官员运营,去年曾要求调查这份礼物。

    特朗普先生对这些担忧不屑一顾,并为自己接受礼物的决定进行辩护。

    “如果我们能得到一架747作为对我们国防部的贡献,在他们建造其他飞机的那几年里使用,我认为这是一个非常好的姿态,”特朗普去年表示,“现在我可能是个愚蠢的人,会说哦,我们不想要免费的飞机。”

    埃莉诺·沃森(Eleanor Watson)对本文有贡献。

    https://www.cbsnews.com/video/trump-arrives-in-davos-after-air-force-one-turned-around-due-to-minor-electrical-issue/

    Jet donated by Qatar could start serving as Trump’s new Air Force One this summer, Air Force says

    January 22, 2026 / 12:20 AM EST / CBS News

    President Trump could start flying in a plane donated by Qatar as early as this summer, as the U.S. Air Force confirms it will deliver the refurbished jumbo jet for use as Air Force One within months.

    “The Air Force remains committed to expediting delivery of the VC-25 bridge aircraft in support of the Presidential airlift mission, with an anticipated delivery no later than summer 2026,” an Air Force spokesperson said Wednesday, confirming a report by The Wall Street Journal.

    The royal family of Qatar donated the Boeing 747-style plane for Mr. Trump’s use last spring. The plane could not enter service immediately, though, as the Pentagon needed to retrofit it to serve as Air Force One. It also needed to be checked for security and spying devices before it was accepted, a source told CBS News at the time.

    The donated plane could take the place of two 35-year-old jets that currently serve as Air Force One. Mr. Trump has long pushed to replace the aging planes, but a project to replace them has faced delays, with delivery of two new planes currently set for 2027 and 2028.

    The existing planes showed their age late Tuesday, when Air Force One turned around less than an hour after taking off for Switzerland due to a “minor electrical issue.” The president then switched to a smaller plane before flying across the Atlantic for the World Economic Forum.

    White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt joked at one point during the ordeal that the Qatari jet sounded “much better.”

    The donation has drawn criticism from congressional Democrats and watchdog groups, who have argued it poses ethics concerns for the president to accept a gift worth hundreds of millions of dollars from a foreign country. Some critics have also questioned the cost of retrofitting the donated plane.

    “The fact that taxpayers are now funding a fifth Air Force One, originating from a foreign monarchy, is a staggering abuse of public trust, fiscal priorities, and national security interests,” said Virginia Canter, chief counsel for ethics and anti-corruption at Democracy Defenders Fund, a group run by an Obama-era ethics official that requested an investigation into the gift last year.

    Mr. Trump has brushed off the concerns and defended his decision to accept the gift.

    “If we can get a 747 as a contribution to our Defense Department to use during a couple of years while they’re building the other ones, I think that was a very nice gesture,” Mr. Trump said last year. “Now I could be a stupid person and say, oh no, we don’t want a free plane.”

    Eleanor Watson contributed to this report.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/video/trump-arrives-in-davos-after-air-force-one-turned-around-due-to-minor-electrical-issue/