作者： root

‘We are killing them all over again’: Critics say history is being erased as Trump reshapes narratives at national parks

May 2, 2026 6:00 AM ET / CNN

By Kaanita Iyer, Piper Hudspeth Blackburn, Aleena Fayaz
Updated May 2, 2026, 6:08 AM ET

Photo Illustration by Alberto Mier/CNN

When tourists see a statue of Gustavus Cheyney Doane, a 19th-century explorer, at a Grand Teton National Park visitor center this spring, a marker beneath it that used to be there will now be missing.

It had asked visitors: “How do we acknowledge the good and bad of a figure?” pointing out that Doane’s expedition led to the designation of the first national park – but also that he helped lead a massacre of at least 173 members of the Piegan Blackfeet – an act he bragged about throughout his life.

Its removal was cited in a lawsuit against the Department of the Interior, which manages the country’s national parks, as one of many changes wrought by President Donald Trump’s March 2025 executive order directing the agency to “take action” against public content that “inappropriately disparage Americans past or living.”

The Trump administration argues the order ensures that American history is portrayed in a positive light. But critics say it is erasing elements of the nation’s past.

“We are killing them all over again,” said Tom Rodgers, a member of the Blackfeet Nation who is known as One Who Rides His Horse East, referring to victims of the massacre, which he called one of the “most despicable historical experiences” for Native Americans.

“I think we’re at a point in our country where people think that if you tell half the truth, you’ve told all the truth, and that in itself, is a lie,” he said. “It’s Orwellian.”

Tom Rodgers/One Who Rides His Horse East poses for a portrait in Washington, DC, on Thursday, April 30. Rodgers told CNN his mission stems from a love for his native people and a love story for his late partner, who “now resides amongst the stars” of the Wolf’s Trail, with the stars placed on his suit in memory of her.

Maansi Srivastava/CNN

As the country heads into peak tourist season, evidence of the administration’s unprecedented cultural overhaul will be on display at national parks around the country. The removal of the words at Grand Teton is one of at least 45 changes that were carried out under the executive order, according to Save Our Signs, an advocacy group that tracks changes to National Park Service displays.

For example, in California’s Muir Woods National Monument, signs on the contributions of Native Americans and women have been removed, including a note informing visitors that John Muir once referred to indigenous people using racist language in his diaries and ignored “the genocide they survived.”

“This contributes to an idea that indigenous people don’t belong in parks,” the sign once said.

The administration has also taken aim at warnings about climate change, a factor that impacts monuments placed in natural landscapes.

At South Carolina’s Fort Sumter National Monument, a sign that included details on the looming impacts of climate change, including information on how “rising seas could inundate most of the fort’s walls and flood the historic parade ground” has been removed in its entirety.

The Interior Department told CNN that at Fort Sumter, it “acted to replace materials that were not grounded in real science with information that is accurate, evidence-based, and aligned with how the world actually works.”

Meanwhile, in Washington, DC, a display on George Mason, a founding father, has removed references to him “paradoxically” owning slaves despite being a champion of “individual rights.”

A new panel on founding father George Mason does not mention that he was a slaveowner.

Kaanita Iyer/CNN

The removals come as America enters a moment replete with opportunity to reflect upon its history, with celebrations to commemorate its 250th birthday throughout this year.

The Trump administration’s efforts have drawn backlash from some lawmakers and advocacy groups, including the February lawsuit from a coalition of conservationists and advocates citing the Doane and other sign removals. It accused the administration of “mounting a sustained campaign to erase history and undermine science.” The case in Massachusetts is still pending.

The Interior Department told CNN: “This effort is not about removing history. It is about ensuring taxpayer-funded displays present history in a balanced, factual and appropriate manner that reflects America’s full story, including its extraordinary achievements and its challenges.”

Experts and local park leaders were consulted “as appropriate” for removal decisions, it said, and argued that the directive “strengthens public trust and helps visitors better understand the complexity of America’s story.”

Widespread removal

Following Trump’s executive order, the Interior Department ordered a review of content such as exhibits, films, pamphlets and signs at national parks.

The department also directed NPS to encourage national park visitors to submit comments on signs, including whether they notice any “negative” messaging about “either past or living Americans.”

If an item was deemed to be “inconsistent” with Trump’s executive order, it could be removed or replaced.

According to an internal NPS database seen by CNN, hundreds of displays were flagged for review.

Signage at the Muir Woods National Monument in March 2025, which includes details about the contributions of Native Americans and women to the preservation of Muir Woods.

Save Our Signs

Signage at the Muir Woods National Monument, in September 2025.

Save Our Signs

The array of content flagged included a diverse set of items deemed as potentially disparaging to Americans “past or living.”

Items marked for review include books for sale about slavery, displays about the forced internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, and a film about 19th century mill workers in Massachusetts.

While it does not say which were removed, it contains notes that reflect how widely department guidance was interpreted.

One flagged display recalled abolitionist Elijah Parish Lovejoy’s killing. “This document states a ‘mob murders’ an abolitionist. Does this denigrate the murderers?” the comment asks. It suggests rewording the inscription to “Abolitionist editor Elijah Lovejoy is murdered for his views.”

A panel at a National Park in St. Croix is flagged with a note saying it “discusses the slave trade and its connection to the sugar industry which some may find disparaging or inappropriate.”

The sign below Doane’s statue was flagged with a comment noting that it was “temporary” and could be removed “as necessary.”

A statue of Gustavus Cheyney Doane at a Grand Teton National Park visitor center.

Noa Ben Hamou

An undated portrait of Doane.

Library of Congress

The Interior Department contended that the database was “edited before being inappropriately and illegally released to the media in ways that misrepresented the status of this effort,” but did not specify what was changed.

“Employees who altered internal records and leaked in an effort to hurt the Trump administration will be held accountable,” the agency said in a statement.

A source familiar with the database confirmed the accuracy of its contents to CNN, and that the changes were only in formatting.

Kym Hall, a former NPS regional director who retired in October 2024, told CNN that she has heard from current agency staff that they are burned out and demoralized after being required to carry out sign changes and removals.

“That’s the recurring theme … ‘This isn’t what I signed up for because this isn’t who we are as an organization,’” Hall said of her conversations with friends and former colleagues.

Advocates push back

Since the removals began last summer, several national park advocates have been pushing back against the administration’s claims that it is restoring the truth.

“We do great damage to ourselves, our own souls when we seek to control a narrative that is not true,” Rodgers told CNN.

Rodgers — who was part of the effort that renamed Mount Doane in Yellowstone National Park to First Peoples Mountain — accused the administration of attempting to “spin” Doane’s legacy with the sign removal at Grand Teton.

Rodgers poses for a portrait in Washington, DC, on Thursday, April 30.

CNN/Maansi Srivastava/CNN

The administration is “erasing half of the narrative” Elizabeth Villano, a co-creator of the Muir Woods sign, wrote in a LinkedIn post in response to the sign changes there.

Pushback has brought mixed success.

Last month, a federal court blocked the NPS from going forward with plans to replace slavery-related exhibits at the President’s House Site in Philadelphia. Critics said that the new panels sanitized the exhibition, which was erected to recognize individuals enslaved by George Washington.

Democrats in the House and Senate have sent letters to Interior Department leadership as recently as April, asking for further clarity about the agency’s review.

The Interior Department has not responded to letters from Democrats in Congress, according to the offices of Sen. Martin Heinrich and Reps. Sharice Davids and Jared Huffman.

The meaning of history

Huffman also expressed alarm at the cultural overhaul taking place just months ahead of the 250th anniversary of the country’s founding. “Actual history is getting whitewashed and censored from national parks and museums,” Huffman said at a February hearing, “We should honor the 250th anniversary of America by telling the truth.”

Alan Spears, a senior director at the National Parks Conservation Association, told CNN: “This notion of needing to restore truth and sanity to American history is one of the largest red herrings in American history. It’s trying to resolve a problem that doesn’t really exist, that never really existed.”

The White House defended the removals. In a statement, White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers told CNN that Trump “is honoring our country’s extraordinary heritage and restoring a sense of national pride.”

“The President has put an end to the radical left’s divisive and inaccurate characterization of our nation’s history, which infiltrated our national parks and museums, and is restoring truth and sanity,” she said.

But the course of history changes, Rodgers, the Blackfeet Nation member, noted: Those in charge now won’t be in power forever, “and there will be a time and a place of our choosing to rectify this,” he said.

Tortured in China, they want to sue Cisco. The Supreme Court may say no.

2026-05-02 / The Washington Post

The Supreme Court will soon decide whether members of the Falun Gong religious group can sue Cisco for its alleged role in a Chinese government crackdown.

Today at 5:00 a.m. EDT

By Julian Mark and Eva Dou

William Wang was leaving his office in Beijing when plainclothes officers accosted him in the street and threw him into a police car.

It was August 2002. Wang was taken to a facility where Chinese security officers interrogated him, beating him and shocking him with electric batons until their batteries ran out of charge, Wang alleged in a lawsuit filed in 2011. Wang remained imprisoned for nearly a decade, subjected to solitary confinement, forced labor, beatings and other forms of torture, he said.

His offense: being a member of Falun Gong, a spiritual movement that China’s government viewed as a political threat and eventually crushed through force.

Now living in the United States, Wang has been waiting years to move forward with a lawsuit against an American technology giant — Cisco Systems. Wang’s lawsuit alleges Cisco was a key technical supplier for the surveillance system that allowed the Chinese Communist Party’s persecution of him and other Falun Gong members.

“I have no objection to normal business dealings,” Wang, who lives in the Detroit area and works as a software developer, said in an interview. What Cisco did was different, he said, because the company “knew what the CCP wanted to do” with its technology.

The company denies that. Whether a court will ever determine whose account is correct will depend on the outcome of a case argued in late April before the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices’ ruling, expected later this year, could close U.S. courts to claims like Wang’s that U.S. companies “aided and abetted” foreign governments in violating internationally recognized human rights.

At issue is a centuries-old law, the Alien Tort Statute, passed by the First Congress in 1789. The law was originally designed to avoid diplomatic conflicts by creating an opportunity for noncitizens, such as ambassadors, to sue over treatment in the United States.

The statute collected dust for 200 years until a federal appeals court revived it in a torture case involving citizens of Paraguay. An appeals court in New York ruled in 1980 that two Paraguayan citizens could sue a Paraguayan police official in U.S. court for torturing and killing their 17-year-old son.

Human rights lawyers hoped the ruling would turn the Alien Tort Statute into a powerful tool to combat rights violations. Over the past two decades, however, the Supreme Court has narrowed the scope of the law, making it harder to bring human rights cases.

The Cisco case presents the court’s conservative majority with the opportunity to even further constrict the law’s reach, experts say.

During arguments Tuesday, the high court grappled with those questions. Although some justices appeared skeptical that the law created a right for the Falun Gong members to sue, others seemed to appreciate the pitfalls of closing the door completely.

“It seems to me that you have a serious conceptual challenge because we’ve held that the First Congress wanted courts to, you know, look and find the rights of action that are available under common law,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said in an exchange with a lawyer for the Office of the Solicitor General, which is supporting Cisco. “You’re certainly not being … faithful to the First Congress’s intent.”

Nevertheless, there has been“lot of opposition” among the justices toward using the Alien Tort Statute to bring human rights claims against companies, said William Dodge, a law professor at George Washington University who regularly writes about international legal issues.

“While they almost certainly don’t want to overrule it outright … they can follow the same pattern that they followed in cases to date,” Dodge said, noting that in four prior cases the high court has restricted the law’s use in human rights claims.

Among the court’s concerns in those cases was that the statute should not reach to countries outside the United States and that suing foreign corporations could have negative foreign policy implications. And all along the high court has been skeptical that the law’s framers meant for it to be used in human rights lawsuits.

In 2018, the high court ruled against 6,000 people who alleged that they or family members had been victims of Hamas terrorist attacks and who sued the Jordan-based Arab Bank. They alleged the bank helped fund the group. The 5-4 opinion along ideological lines held that foreign corporations cannot be sued under the statute for events that took place outside of U.S. jurisdiction.

In 2021, the court ruled against a group of formerly enslaved children who alleged that Nestlé USA bought most of its cocoa from farms on the Ivory Coast of West Africa where child slavery has flourished. The 8-1 decision found that not enough of the actions alleged in the plaintiffs’ case took place in the United States to be heard in U.S. courts.

Unlike the Nestlé case, Wang and his fellow plaintiffs — 11 other Chinese nationals and one U.S. citizen — say that key actions in their case took place in the U.S.: Cisco designed the system and built its components in Silicon Valley, they say. And they allege Cisco knew that the Chinese government was using its system to persecute Falun Gong members.

“All along, Cisco was clear about how the crackdown benefitted the company,” the plaintiffs’ told the court in a brief. “Cisco’s files described the douzheng[violent struggle] of Falun Gong ‘as a lucrative business opportunity.’”

Cisco denies that. “Cisco does not customize or develop specialized or unique filtering capabilities in order to enable different regimes to block access to information,” Mark Chandler, then a senior vice president with the company, testified in 2008 to the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on human rights and the law.

In an email to The Washington Post, a Cisco spokeswoman pointed to a statement issued by Chandler after Wang and other plaintiffs filed their lawsuit in 2011. “We have never customized our equipment to help the Chinese government — or any government — censor content, track Internet use by individuals or intercept Internet communications,” he wrote.

At the Supreme Court, however, those factual questions have been largely set aside in favor of a strictly legal one: Cisco argues that the plaintiffs should not be able to take the case to court at all. The plaintiffs are bending the Alien Tort Statute to cover disputes it was never intended for, the company says.

According to Cisco, backed by the Trump administration and a wide variety of business organizations, the First Congress worried primarily about violations of the rights of ambassadors and piracy — not the possibility of U.S. entities aiding and abetting human rights abuses by foreign governments.

“Aiding-and-abetting liability constitutes a significant expansion of a civil cause of action. For that reason, this court has made clear that it is generally not available absent clear congressional direction,” Kannon Shanmugam, a lawyer for Cisco, told the justices during the April hearing. “And recognizing such a cause of action would raise substantial foreign policy concerns, as in this case, which involves serious allegations of wrongdoing in a foreign country by a foreign government.”

Washington Legal Foundation, a pro-business advocacy group, added in an amicus brief that lawsuits under the Alien Tort Statute “would expose American companies to costly, burdensome, and lengthy litigation.”

If Congress believes companies should be open to lawsuits in U.S. courts for alleged abuses overseas, it could pass a law to explicitly allow such cases, the company and its supporters argue. The courts should not create liability by reinterpreting a law passed centuries ago, they say.

Cisco won that argument before a district court but lost in the California-based Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. The company appealed to the Supreme Court.

The appeals ruling, if it stands, “would open the floodgates for suits against corporations in the U.S. for human right violations merely based on legal exports of goods and services,” the company’s chief legal officer, Dev Stahlkopf, wrote in a statement after the 9th Circuit ruling.

But if the Supreme Court sides with Cisco, the ruling could effectively end the use of the Alien Tort Statute for human rights cases, said Paul Hoffman, a California attorney for the plaintiffs.

“Under Petitioners’ theory, Cisco cannot be held responsible for aiding and abetting these violations no matter how substantial and direct their contributions were,” Hoffman said, standing before the justices at the April hearing. “Under Cisco’s theory, even the corporate actors who provided the poison gas for Nazi crematoria would not be liable under” the Alien Tort Statute.

Wang’s case illustrates the sorts of corporate behavior that human rights advocates hope the law can be used to police. He alleges that the Chinese government used Cisco’s technology to monitor him, leading to his arrest and imprisonment.

Wang joined Falun Gong while studying engineering at Tsinghua University in Beijing. He was drawn to the movement’s embrace of Qigong, a type of exercise that includes flowing movements, breathing and meditation, he said in a recent interview. He also connected with its teachings of kindness and tolerance.

At that time, Falun Gong had become widely popular across China, with as many as 100 million practitioners in 1999. Its growing political organizing power drew concerns from Chinese officials. After more than 10,000 Falun Gong practitioners gathered in Beijing for a protest in April 1999, China’s then-leader, Jiang Zemin, ordered a harsh crackdown, which involved widespread extrajudicial detentions, torture of practitioners during interrogations and forced labor in reeducation camps, according to news reports at time and accounts from torture victims like Wang.

That campaign soon hit Tsinghua. Wang said he faced pressure from government officials to renounce his faith. At one point, a government official encouraged dozens of Wang’s classmates to condemn him and his beliefs during a two-hour shaming session, he said. Eventually, Wang left the university and was forced to give up his quest for a doctorate.

While he was imprisoned, he said, government officials said they knew he had been writing articles about the persecution of other Falun Gong members at the university — even though he wrote his articles anonymously and sent them to the publication via encrypted files. Only after Wang was released from prison in 2011 did he learn the full scope of the surveillance and that Cisco had allegedly built the system that made it possible.

China’s embassy did not respond to a request for comment.

By then, Cisco’s alleged involvement in Chinese surveillance had become public. After the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing, an internal Cisco slide deck on market opportunities in China was leaked to the media. The slide deck cited a Chinese government official saying the Golden Shield project, for which Cisco was a vendor, could “combat ‘Falun Gong’ evil religion and other hostiles.” The slides drew scrutiny from Congress.

In the 2008 Senate hearing, Cisco’s Chandler told senators that he was “appalled” and “disappointed” at the slide deck. The company issued a statement saying the slides did not represent Cisco’s views or principles.

Wang said Cisco should face some kind of accountability.

“I hope all American companies can make money,” he said. But “we need to understand what things are acceptable and what things are not.”

William Wang, shown earlier this year, was imprisoned in 2002 for nearly a decade. (Nic Antaya/For The Washington Post)

By Julian Mark

Julian Mark covers the Supreme Court for The Washington Post. follow on X@juleswapo

By Eva Dou

Eva Dou is a Washington-based reporter covering technology policy for the Washington Post. Connect securely on Signal with her about tech and policy developments at evd.10. follow on X evadou

Meta faces New Mexico trial that could force changes to Facebook, other platforms

2026-05-02 / Reuters

By Diana Novak Jones

May 2, 2026 10:04 AM UTC Updated 1 hour ago

The logo of Meta is seen during the Viva Technology conference dedicated to innovation and startups at Porte de Versailles exhibition center in Paris, France, June 12, 2025. REUTERS/Benoit Tessier/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

• New Mexico seeks billions in damages, sweeping platform changes to protect minors
• Meta argues changes are impossible, may force withdrawal from state
• Trial tests public nuisance claims as over 40 states pursue similar lawsuits

May 2 (Reuters) – A trial beginning in New Mexico on Monday could prompt a judge to order sweeping changes to how Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp operate – a move Meta Platforms META.O has warned could ​force it to withdraw from the state.

The case, which will be tried before a judge in Santa Fe, stems from a lawsuit filed by New Mexico Attorney ‌General Raúl Torrez, a Democrat, accusing the social media giant of designing its products to addict young users and failing to protect children from sexual exploitation on its platforms.

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

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

At the heart of the trial is whether Meta’s platforms have created a “public nuisance” under New Mexico law. That finding would allow the judge to order wide‑ranging remedies aimed at curbing alleged harms to young users. The case is being closely watched as states, municipalities and school districts across the country ​pursue similar claims seeking to force changes at the industry level.

Monday’s trial marks the second phase of New Mexico’s lawsuit. A jury in March found Meta violated the state’s consumer protection ​law by misrepresenting the safety of Facebook and Instagram for young users. It ordered the company to pay $375 million in damages.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Criticism of children’s safety on ⁠social media has been mounting for years. On Wednesday, Meta warned investors that legal and regulatory blowback in the European Union and the U.S. “could significantly impact our business and financial results.”

SWEEPING REMEDIES AT STAKE

Torrez’s ​office is expected to seek both billions of dollars more in damages and an order requiring Meta to make substantial changes to its platforms for New Mexico users, according to court filings.

Meta has said it ​has already addressed many of the state’s concerns and taken extensive measures to ensure its young users are safe. The company said in court filings last week that many of the changes Torrez’s office is seeking are impossible for it to comply with and may force it to withdraw from the state entirely.

“The New Mexico Attorney General’s focus on a single platform is a misguided strategy that ignores the hundreds of other apps teens use daily,” a ​Meta spokesperson said in a statement ahead of the trial. “Rather than providing comprehensive protections, the state’s proposed mandates infringe on parental rights and stifle free expression for all New Mexicans.”

A ‘PUBLIC NUISANCE’

The trial before ​Judge Bryan Biedscheid will examine whether Meta’s conduct meets the standard for a public nuisance under New Mexico law, which would allow the court to impose remedies aimed at abating the alleged harm.

A public nuisance claim targets ‌activities that unreasonably ⁠interfere with the health and safety of a community. Classic examples include blocking a public road, polluting a waterway or emitting noxious fumes. State governments have invoked public nuisance law in recent decades to pursue a broader range of industries, including litigation tied to tobacco, opioids, climate change, and vaping, said Adam Zimmerman, a professor at USC’s Gould School of Law.

New Mexico’s case is among a growing number of lawsuits accusing Meta and other social media companies of intentionally designing products to be addictive to young people. While many cases have been filed by families over specific injuries to individuals, more than 40 other ​states and over 1,300 school districts have filed ​lawsuits seeking court-ordered changes and damages under public ⁠nuisance law.

New Mexico said it plans to ask the judge to order Meta to make changes including verifying users’ ages; redesigning its algorithm to promote quality content for minors; and ending autoplay and infinite scrolling for minors.

“It will be an opportunity for us to explore more deeply the size and scale and ​effectively the monetary value of the public nuisance harm that was a product of this business’s behavior for the last, you know, 10 ​or 15 years,” Torrez told ⁠reporters at a press conference on Thursday ahead of the trial.

The company has said in court filings that it cannot have created a public nuisance because it has not interfered with a public right. It also said there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that social media has caused mental health problems, and that many of the state’s requests are “technologically impractical or completely impossible.”

In a public nuisance case, the state ⁠can also seek ​money damages to abate the harm. That sum could be substantial when the impact is said to have affected large segments ​of the population. Torrez’s office has not detailed the amount it will seek.

Meta said in court filings New Mexico plans to ask for $3.7 billion in damages to fund a 15-year mental health plan including new healthcare facilities and hiring providers, a request ​it said would require it pay for mental health care for all teens in the state regardless of the cause of their needs.

Reporting by Diana Novak Jones, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and David Gregorio

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

Democrats who rallied at ‘No Kings’ protests applaud King Charles in Congress

Rudolph Giuliani, Michael Rapaport and GOP lawmakers highlighted the contrast as Democrats clapped for the British monarch

May 2, 2026 7:00am EDT / Fox News

Democrats who rallied with liberal activists at nationwide “No Kings” protests just weeks ago were widely mocked for pivoting to offer the United Kingdom’s King Charles III a royal welcome in Congress and elsewhere.

Charles’ speech highlighted a contradiction between anti-monarchy rhetoric and public protests involving Democrats and the raucous welcome extended to the British monarch during his address to Congress.

Rep. Mike Collins, R-Ga., criticized Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., whom he said hypocritically cheered Charles several months after speaking at a “No Kings” protest in Savannah.

“Hold on a minute, wasn’t this the same Jon Ossoff who was just out there a few weeks ago hooting and hollering about ‘No Kings’ at his rally… He’ll shout ‘No Kings’ all day, but once the king comes around, man, he’s got him a front-row seat,” the Jackson lawmaker said.

TIM ALLEN TROLLS ‘NO KINGS’ LAWMAKERS FOR FAWNING OVER ACTUAL KING CHARLES

President Donald Trump greets Britain’s King Charles III at the South Portico of the White House for a state dinner on Tuesday, April 28, 2026, in Washington, D.C.(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

“I was on my way to hear an actual King speak,” Rep. Greg Steube, R-Fla., said in a statement after Charles’ address. “Funny how the ‘No Kings’ crowd is nowhere to be found. Guess the outrage depends on who’s talking?”

At a March 29 “No Kings” protest in Minnesota, Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minneapolis spoke at an event headlined by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, telling the crowd that the U.S. pledges allegiance to the “Constitution, not a King.”

The day prior, Rep. Don Beyer, D-Va., spoke to the press at a “No Kings” protest in his area, saying that the crowd was exercising its freedom of speech against Trump while titling the clip on his social media page “No Kings, not now, not ever.”

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., authored the “No Kings Act” in 2024 in rebuke of the Supreme Court’s ruling that presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution stemming from actions taken under their constitutional authority while in office.

“‘No Kings’ protest leaders welcome KING CHARLES with a standing ovation; you can’t make this up,” quipped former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, as press cutaway shots of Charles’ address to Congress showed multiple ‘No Kings’ Democrats like Beyer smiling or clapping.

‘NO KINGS’ CALLS ITSELF LEADERLESS BUT ITS OWN INTERNAL DOCUMENTS TELL A VERY DIFFERENT STORY

Rep. Donald Beyer Jr., D-Va., attends a protest in Washington.(Tom Williams/Getty Images)

“Look who was elated to see the king – Ms. No Kings,” quipped liberal pro-Israel actor Michael Rapaport, who included photos of a grinning Omar taking photographs of Charles on her phone.

Sen. Ashley Moody, R-Fla., also called out alleged hypocrisy from the royals’ trip:

“Why did I just watch every Democrat in Congress stand and clap for an actual King?” she said, featuring screenshots from Fox News Channel’s House chamber feed.

“‘No Kings’ crowd greets King Charles with a standing ovation,” added right-wing X commentator “EndWokeness.”

“Biggest bull**** artists of the century,” added commentator Robby Starbuck.

Former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli shared another clip from b-roll of Charles’ speech, characterizing Democrats’ position as “No Kings +/- 1.”

Trump himself weighed in on the “No Kings” aspect during an interview with CBS’ Norah O’Donnell after she asked him about Hilton assassination suspect Cole Allen attending such a protest in California.

TRUMP REACTS TO ‘NO KINGS’ PROTESTS BY SAYING ‘I’M NOT A KING, I WORK MY ASS OFF’

Demonstrators rally in front of the Lincoln Memorial during the No Kings protest in Washington on March 28, 2026.(Jose Luis Magana/AP)

“No Kings, yeah… If I was a king, I wouldn’t be dealing with you,” Trump retorted.

After Charles departed for London, the Democrat representing former President George Washington’s longtime home lambasted Trump for what he characterized as a concession to the king.

Trump announced Friday he agreed to an apparent request from Charles to remove trade restrictions on whiskey to help Scotland work with Kentucky’s liquor businesses, as the former utilizes the latter’s used barrels.

“Now we’re taking orders from the King of England,” said Virginia Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell, D-Mount Vernon.

“George Washington just rolled over.”

Fox News Digital reached out to Beyer, Ossoff and Omar for comment.

Charles Creitz is a reporter for Fox News Digital.

He joined Fox News in 2013 as a writer and production assistant.

Charles covers media, politics and culture for Fox News Digital.

Charles is a Pennsylvania native and graduated from Temple University with a B.A. in Broadcast Journalism. Story tips can be sent to charles.creitz@fox.com.

日本奈良发生5.7级地震

2026年5月2日 18:32 / 联合早报

据日本气象厅消息，日本奈良县（Nara Prefecture）发生5.7级地震。

日本气象厅说，地震发生于星期六（5月2日）18时28分（新加坡时间17时28分）许，震中位于北纬34.1度、东经135.6度，震源深度约70千米，震级为5.7级。

新华社引述日本放送协会电视台播出的画面报道，当地晃动较为明显。

目前暂无人员伤亡报告。日本气象厅说，无需担心地震引发海啸。

日本奈良发生5.7级地震

2026年5月2日 18:32 / 联合早报

据日本气象厅消息，日本奈良县（Nara Prefecture）发生5.7级地震。

日本气象厅说，地震发生于星期六（5月2日）18时28分（新加坡时间17时28分）许，震中位于北纬34.1度、东经135.6度，震源深度约70千米，震级为5.7级。

新华社引述日本放送协会电视台播出的画面报道，当地晃动较为明显。

目前暂无人员伤亡报告。日本气象厅说，无需担心地震引发海啸。

美制裁五家中企 中方发禁令称不得承认和得遵守

2026年5月2日 19:47 / 联合早报

美国以参与涉伊朗石油交易为由，对五家中国企业实制裁，中国商务部发布阻断禁令，规定不得承认、不得执行、不得遵守美国的制裁措施。

美国政府以涉嫌违规交易伊朗石油为由，将包括恒力石化（大连）炼化有限公司、山东寿光鲁清石化有限公司、山东金诚石化集团有限公司、河北鑫海化工集团有限公司、山东胜星化工有限公司在内的五家中国企业列入“特别指定国民清单”（SDN清单），实施冻结资产和禁止交易等制裁措施。

中国商务部网站星期六（5月2日）公布对制裁措施的阻断禁令。公告称， 为维护国家主权、安全、发展利益，保护中国公民、法人或其他组织的合法权益，中国商务部根据《阻断外国法律与措施不当域外适用办法》相关条例和工作机制的决定，规定不得承认、不得执行、不得遵守相关制裁。

中国商务部新闻发言人称，美方制裁不当禁止或限制中国企业与第三国（地区）及其公民、法人或其他组织开展正常的经贸及相关活动，违反国际法和国际关系基本准则。

发言人也称，中国政府一贯反对缺乏联合国授权和国际法依据的单边制裁。“此次发布禁令，是依法实施《阻断外国法律与措施不当域外适用办法》的具体行动，不影响中方承担和履行国际义务，也不影响中国依法保护外商投资企业的合法权益”。中国商务部将继续密切跟踪有关国家法律与措施不当域外适用的情况，如存在《阻断外国法律与措施不当域外适用办法》规定的情形，将依法开展相关工作。

北约：与美国合作 了解驻德美军撤离细节

2026年5月2日 19:02 / 联合早报

4月27日，在克里特岛海岸附近，一架NH90直升机的机组人员在法国海军护卫舰“阿尔萨斯”号上进行训练活动，这是北约“海王星打击26-2”演习的一部分。 （法新社）

北大西洋公约组织发言人说，北约正与美国合作，了解美国计划从德国撤军的细节。

北约发言人艾莉森·哈特星期六（5月2日）在社交媒体X网站上写道：“我们正与美国合作，了解关于驻德兵力部署的决定细节。这一调整凸显了欧洲需要继续加大国防投入，并承担更多维护共同安全的责任——自去年在海牙举行的北约峰会上，盟国同意将国内生产总值的5%用于国防以来，我们已经看到这方面取得了进展。”

路透社引述她说：“随着欧洲向更强大的北约迈进，我们仍然有信心履行我们的威慑和防御职责。”

北约：与美国合作 了解驻德美军撤离细节

2026年5月2日 19:02 / 联合早报

4月27日，在克里特岛海岸附近，一架NH90直升机的机组人员在法国海军护卫舰“阿尔萨斯”号上进行训练活动，这是北约“海王星打击26-2”演习的一部分。 （法新社）

北大西洋公约组织发言人说，北约正与美国合作，了解美国计划从德国撤军的细节。

北约发言人艾莉森·哈特星期六（5月2日）在社交媒体X网站上写道：“我们正与美国合作，了解关于驻德兵力部署的决定细节。这一调整凸显了欧洲需要继续加大国防投入，并承担更多维护共同安全的责任——自去年在海牙举行的北约峰会上，盟国同意将国内生产总值的5%用于国防以来，我们已经看到这方面取得了进展。”

路透社引述她说：“随着欧洲向更强大的北约迈进，我们仍然有信心履行我们的威慑和防御职责。”

美国汉学家宇文所安逝世 享年79岁

2026年5月2日 15:18 / 联合早报

美国汉学家宇文所安星期五（5月1日）逝世，享年79岁。 （互联网）

美国汉学家宇文所安星期五（5月1日）逝世，享年79岁。他长期致力于中国古典文学、抒情诗与比较诗学研究，被中国媒体评价“提供了理解中国文学的新范式”。

综合澎湃新闻和极目新闻报道，中国作家协会诗刊社官方微信公众号“诗刊社”星期六（5月2日）发布消息称，哈佛大学詹姆斯·布莱恩特·科南特荣休教授宇文所安2026年5月1日在美国麻省剑桥逝世。

宇文所安1946年出生于美国密苏里州圣路易斯市，主要从事中国古典文学、抒情诗和比较诗学研究，尤其在唐诗、宋词及中国文论领域造诣深厚，被誉为英语世界唐诗研究的权威。

他的主要著作包括：《悉为我有！：11世纪中国的快乐、拥有、命名》（Columbia, 2021），《只是一首歌：中国11世纪至12世纪初的词》（Harvard, 2019），《中国早期古典诗歌的生成》（Harvard, 2006），《诺顿中国古典文学作品选》（Norton, 1996），《中国“中世纪”的终结：中唐文学论集》（Stanford, 1996），《中国文论：英译与评论》（Harvard, 1992）等。他也曾出版杜甫诗歌的英语全译本《杜甫诗》（De Gruyter，2015），并与孙康宜一起主编《剑桥中国文学史》（Cambridge，2010）。

据中国新闻网此前报道，宇文所安读过的唐诗已超过万首。14岁时，他在图书馆偶然翻阅中国诗集，由此与中国文学结缘。1972年，26岁的他以论文《韩愈与孟郊的诗》获得耶鲁大学东亚系博士学位，之后在耶鲁、哈佛等高校任教，成为唐诗研究领中首屈一指的美国汉学家。

对于“外国人如何能理解唐诗”的疑问，宇文所安常反问：“中国人为何可以理解堂吉诃德或莎士比亚？”他认为，唐诗对现代中国人而言同样属于遥远的历史时代，文化与种族并不会构成真正的理解障碍。