分类: 未分类

  • 机器人探索法国最深沉船,发现500年前沉没的大炮与陶瓷制品


    2026年4月29日 / 美国东部时间下午2:39 / 哥伦比亚广播公司/法新社

    在法国海岸外地中海海面深处,一台遥控水下机器人的机械臂正轻柔地夹住一块靠近16世纪沉船的古老陶罐。

    “操作必须极度精准,不能破坏遗址,不能搅动沉积物,”海军军官塞巴斯蒂安说道,出于安全原因他不便透露全名。

    本次任务是法国领海内最深沉船的多次考古考察任务中的首次,距离法国里维埃拉仅两小时航程。去年,军方在海底进行例行勘测时,偶然在拉马图耶海岸附近、圣特罗佩附近海域发现了这艘16世纪商船。

    2026年4月7日,在法国东南部卡马拉4号沉船考古任务期间,法国海军水下机器人专业操作人员与研究人员通过屏幕实时观看“ROV C 4000”遥控潜水器的传回画面。 蒂博·莫里茨/法新社/盖蒂图片社

    考古学家认为,这艘船当时从意大利北部出发,装载着陶瓷制品和金属棒,随后沉没。

    如今,法国海军与文化部水下考古部门重返现场,对这片沉没在海平面以下1.5英里多的海域中的残存文物进行勘测。

    大炮与成堆陶罐

    海军并未公开沉船遗址的具体位置,他们将其命名为“卡马拉特4号”——即便大多数人也没有能力抵达如此深的海域。

    任务的海军拖船载着水下机器人和两个作为临时考古学家办公室的大型集装箱抵达现场时,太阳才刚刚升起。

    工作人员将配备摄像头和机械臂的机器人放入水中。

    一名海军军官通过长缆绳操控机器人下潜,专家们在屏幕上监控其缓慢下潜的过程。

    一小时后,这款最大下潜深度可达4000米的设备在海床上的成堆圆形陶罐上方缓缓移动。

    通过搭载的摄像头,它逐渐向甲板上的团队展示了沉船的全貌。

    摄像头捕捉到一门大炮的画面,以及数百件带有花卉图案、十字架和鱼类装饰的陶罐与盘子。

    考古学家称,他们偶然在法国南部海域水下1.5英里多的位置发现了这艘16世纪商船的残骸。 法国海军 via 法国水下与海底考古研究部

    机器人每秒拍摄8张照片,连续拍摄3小时,总计采集超过8.6万张图像,之后将用于创建遗址的3D模型。

    考古学家弗朗卡·奇贝奇尼对水质清澈感到十分高兴。

    “能见度极佳,你几乎意识不到这里水深如此之大,”她说。

    “这很可能是一艘载有利古里亚地区釉面陶器的商船,”她补充道,利古里亚是意大利西北部的一个大区。

    她表示,这艘船的货物应该是在热那亚或附近的萨沃纳港口装载的。

    专家此前已在沉船中发现了两口大锅、一个锚和六门大炮。

    现场还发现了现代垃圾,比如一个汽水罐或空酸奶容器。官方发布的一张照片显示,锚旁边似乎有一个铝制易拉罐。

    考古学家称,他们偶然在法国南部海域水下1.5英里多的位置发现了这艘16世纪商船的残骸。 法国海军 via 法国水下与海底考古研究部

    “有史以来打捞到的最深文物之一”

    水下考古项目首席考古学家玛丽娜·萨达尼亚表示,这些发现将成为了解该沉船沉没时代贸易路线的关键线索。

    “关于16世纪商船的详细史料并不多,因此这是研究海事历史的宝贵信息来源,”她说。

    当机器人小心翼翼地将一个陶罐放入保护箱时,专家们都屏住了呼吸,生怕将其打碎。

    萨达尼亚说,从海底打捞上来的陶瓷制品中有三分之一会碎裂。

    团队总共打捞上来数个陶罐和盘子。

    回到陆地上马赛南部港口城市的实验室后,萨达尼亚用水冲洗其中一个陶罐。

    圆润的罐身上布满深蓝色线条,勾勒出矩形图案,其中一些区域用绿松石蓝上色,或装饰有藏黄色的符号。

    “这是法国沉船打捞史上最深的文物之一,”她说。

    这张照片展示了2026年4月16日,在马赛DRASSM实验室分析期间,从卡马拉4号沉船中打捞上来的陶瓷陶罐。 蒂博·莫里茨/法新社/盖蒂图片社

    在此之前,法国官方发现的最深沉船是2019年在南部城市土伦附近海域水下1.4英里处发现的“拉米内夫号”潜艇残骸。这艘法国潜艇在1968年执行例行任务仅4分钟后就沉没,艇上52名海军官兵全部遇难。

    本周二,官方宣布另一艘16世纪沉船在瑞典海岸附近的军事演习中被一艘海军舰艇发现。

    Robot exploring France’s deepest shipwreck finds cannons and ceramics that sank 5 centuries ago

    April 29, 2026 / 2:39 PM EDT / CBS/AFP

    Deep below the surface of the Mediterranean Sea off the French coast, the pincer of a remotely guided underwater robot delicately closes around a centuries-old jug lying near a 16th-century shipwreck.

    “You have to be extremely precise so as not to damage the site, so as not to stir up sediment,” says navy officer Sebastien, who cannot give his second name for security reasons.

    A two-hour journey from the French Riviera, Sebastien is overseeing the first of several archaeological missions on the deepest shipwreck in French territorial waters.

    A routine army survey of the seabed uncovered the 16th-century merchant ship by chance last year in waters off the coast of Ramatuelle, close to Saint-Tropez.

    Pilots specializing in underwater robots from the French Navy, along with researchers, watch live feeds on screens showing the “ROV C 4000,” a remotely operated vehicle, during an archaeological mission on the wreck of the CAMARA 4 in southeastern France, April 7, 2026. Thibaud MORITZ /AFP via Getty Images

    Archaeologists believe the ship was sailing from northern Italy loaded with ceramics and metal bars before it sank.

    Now the French navy and the culture ministry’s underwater archaeology department are back to inspect the surviving artifacts lost more than 1.5 miles below sea level.

    Cannons and piles of jugs

    The navy is keeping secret the location of the wreckage site, which they have dubbed “Camarat 4” — even if most people would unlikely have the means to reach a site so deep.

    The sun has barely risen when the mission’s navy tugboat arrives on site, carrying an underwater robot and two large containers acting as makeshift offices for marine archaeologists.

    Its crew lower the robot — which is equipped with cameras as well as pincers — into the water.

    A navy officer guides the robot down, linked to the ship through a long cable, as experts monitor its slow descent on screens.

    An hour later, the device designed to plunge as deep as 4,000 meters is gliding over piles of round pitchers on the sea floor.

    Slowly, through its cameras, it reveals the wreck to the team sitting on deck.

    It captures footage of a cannon, as well as hundreds of pitchers and plates, decorated with floral motifs, crosses and fish.

    Archaeologists say they discovered by chance what they say are the remains of a 16th-century merchant ship more than 1.5 miles underwater off southern France. National Navy via France’s Department of Underwater and Submarine Archaeological Research

    The robot shoots eight pictures per second for three hours, grabbing more than 86,000 images that will then be used to create a 3D model of the site.

    Archaeologist Franca Cibecchini is delighted the water is so clear.

    “The visibility is excellent. You almost can’t tell it’s so deep,” she says.

    “It is most likely a merchant ship carrying glazed pottery from Liguria,” a region in the northwest of Italy, Cibecchini adds.

    She says it could have been loaded on to the ship in the ports of Genoa or nearby Savona.

    Experts previously identified two cauldrons, an anchor and six cannons at the shipwreck.

    Modern waste, such as a soda can or an empty yogurt container, were spotted too. One image released by officials appeared to show an aluminum can next to an anchor.

    Archaeologists say they discovered by chance what they say are the remains of a 16th-century merchant ship more than 1.5 miles underwater off southern France. National Navy via France’s Department of Underwater and Submarine Archaeological Research

    “One of the deepest objects ever recovered”

    Marine Sadania, the lead archaeologist on the underwater dig, says findings will be key to understanding trade routes at the time the ship sank.

    “We don’t have very detailed texts about merchant ships in the 16th century, so this is a valuable source of information on maritime history,” she says.

    The experts hold their breath as the robot lowers a pitcher into a case as gently as possible, so as not to break it.

    A third of all ceramics extracted from sea digs end up breaking, Sadania says.

    In total, the team hauls up several jugs and plates.

    Back on land, in a laboratory in the southern port city of Marseille, Sadania runs water over one of the jugs.

    Dark blue lines run across its rounded side, creating rectangles, some of which are colored in with turquoise blue or decorated with saffron-yellow symbols.

    “It’s one of the deepest objects ever recovered from a wreck in France,” she says.

    This photograph shows a view of a ceramic jug, recovered from the wreck of the CAMARAT 4, during its analysis at the DRASSM laboratory in Marseille on April 16, 2026. Thibaud MORITZ /AFP via Getty Images

    Before this discovery, the deepest French authorities had found a sunken vessel was 1.4 miles under sea level off the southern city of Toulon in 2019. The wreckage belonged to La Minerve, a French submarine that plunged to its demise in 1968 with 52 navy crew on board, only four minutes after the start of a routine assignment.

    On Tuesday, officials revealed that another 16th-century shipwreck was discovered by a naval vessel during a military exercise off the coast of Sweden.

  • 要点汇总:最高法院暗示将在海地和叙利亚移民问题上支持特朗普


    2026-04-29T16:41:40.815Z / 美国有线电视新闻网(CNN)

    作者:约翰·弗里茨与德文·科尔
    更新于1小时3分钟前
    更新时间:2026年4月29日,美国东部时间下午3:16
    发布时间:2026年4月29日,美国东部时间中午12:41

    image
    2026年4月29日,移民权利活动家及示威者在美国最高法院外举行集会,一名男子手持标语牌站在人群中。

    美国最高法院周三暗示,将支持唐纳德·特朗普总统终止针对数百万来自战乱和自然灾害国家外籍人士的临时驱逐保护令的举措。

    这是特朗普第二任期内提交至最高法院的最重要移民上诉案件之一,由六名保守派大法官组成的多数派暗示,他们认为当政府启动或终止临时保护身份(TPS)时,联邦法院甚至可能无权审查相关法律质疑。

    相关直播报道

    image
    2026年4月13日的美国最高法院外景。
    最高法院限制《投票权法案》适用范围,并就临时保护身份问题听取辩论

    如果这一观点成立,其影响将远超挑战特朗普终止两国TPS决定的海地和叙利亚公民,还可能有效阻止针对其他政府决策的诉讼。

    目前有超过100万移民通过该项目获准在美国生活和工作。

    以下是口头辩论的五大要点:

    保守派大法官暗示法院无管辖权

    包括首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨在内的多名保守派大法官聚焦于联邦法院无权审查TPS决定的合法性这一观点。原因是国会在TPS法案中加入了一项条款,明确规定政府的“裁定”不可被审查。

    “如果我们按照过往判例解读该条款,我实在不明白你方如何能胜诉,”保守派大法官塞缪尔·阿利托说道。

    代表叙利亚TPS受益人出庭的律师阿希兰·阿鲁兰纳坦辩称,虽然最终裁定不可审查,但官员做出裁定的过程仍可被挑战。

    但另一名保守派大法官艾米·科尼·巴雷特似乎对此表示怀疑。

    “既然所有人真正关心的都是实质内容,那国会为何要允许对程序方面进行审查?”她问道。

    最高法院对程序问题的关注虽然具有技术性,但也颇具指示意义。由于大法官们如此聚焦于法院是否有权审理此案,他们花在讨论特朗普政府在决策过程中是否违反法律或宪法的时间要少得多。

    相关报道

    image
    2026年3月17日,海地援助中心执行主任维莱·多桑维尔和俄亥俄州斯普林菲尔德大格雷斯教堂副牧师布兰登·彼得森在华盛顿特区美国最高法院外聆听祈祷。
    特朗普的反移民言论会影响最高法院判决吗? 阅读时长7分钟

    特朗普的言论有影响——但仅对自由派大法官而言

    特朗普撤销海地TPS的决定背后,始终萦绕着他此前对这个岛国及其侨民的攻击性言论。

    这些言论以及前国土安全部部长克里斯蒂·诺伊姆(去年正式撤销海地TPS的官员)的类似言论,是一名联邦法官裁定该政策变更至少部分出于种族敌意的重要依据。这一点至关重要,因为如果终止TPS的决定基于种族,则违反了平等保护条款。

    自由派大法官周三重点关注了这一点,他们质疑政府去年的决定是否存在违宪歧视。

    “我们有一位总统曾多次表示,海地是一个‘肮脏’、‘污秽’和‘令人作呕’的‘粪坑国家’,”最高法院资深自由派大法官索尼娅·索托马约尔在向副检察长D·约翰·绍尔提问时说道,“他还抱怨美国接收来自这类国家的人,而不是挪威、瑞典或丹麦的人。”

    “他将与TPS相关的非法移民称为‘在毒害美国的血液’,”索托马约尔在谈及特朗普时说道,并补充道:“我看不出这句言论如何不能证明‘歧视性目的可能在该决定中发挥了作用’。”

    绍尔回应称,特朗普和诺伊姆的言论并未明确提及种族。

    大法官凯坦吉·布朗·杰克逊也向绍尔施压,要求其解释为何下级法院审理此案时没有考虑特朗普的言论,而最高法院却应忽略这些言论。

    “关于海地和食用宠物的言论,以及针对这些移民的称呼——尽管他们在美国合法居留——这些都是相当近期的事情,”她说道,指的是特朗普在2024年大选期间称俄亥俄州的海地移民吃狗肉的言论。“你对这类言论有何说法?”

    绍尔表示,这些言论“出自不同背景,时间相隔久远”,因此对本案“不具有启发意义”。

    然而,最高法院的保守派大法官们基本回避了总统的言论。

    卡瓦诺聚焦当下叙利亚局势

    大法官布雷特·卡瓦诺是特朗普任命的保守派大法官之一,他是少数就政府的实际决策提出问题的大法官之一。

    但他的问题表明,这位在备受关注的案件中往往持有关键一票的大法官,同意政府的决定。

    奥巴马政府于2012年在前叙利亚总统巴沙尔·阿萨德镇压抗议者后,为部分叙利亚公民授予了TPS。随着当地内战爆发,该身份多次得到延长。但特朗普政府指出,阿萨德政权已于2024年倒台,国土安全部于去年11月宣布将终止TPS身份。

    “但现在已经不是阿萨德政权了,”卡瓦诺对代表叙利亚移民的律师说道,“在53年的彻底压迫和残酷统治之后,这个政权已经倒台。”

    卡瓦诺援引政府诉状中的一句话,向阿鲁兰纳坦追问有多少叙利亚人自行返回了该国。

    “所以你是否同意,阿萨德政权的更迭是该国乃至更广泛中东地区历史上的重大变革?”他问道。

    “我不认为事情如此简单,”阿鲁兰纳坦回应道。

    但阿鲁兰纳坦表示,他无需就如今的叙利亚是否安全展开辩论,因为他的核心观点是政府未进行充分审查。

    卡根:“真的假的?”

    本案的核心问题之一是,国土安全部在终止两国TPS身份之前,是否就当地局势充分咨询了国务院。联邦法律要求进行此类咨询,但TPS受益人代表的律师称,特朗普政府并未重视这一程序。

    在两起案件中,一名国土安全部律师曾就TPS身份问题向国务院官员发送电子邮件,但收到的回复仅表明国务院对终止海地和叙利亚的TPS没有外交政策担忧。

    下级法院认定,此次咨询远未达到联邦法律要求国土安全部应做到的程度。但绍尔向大法官们表示,此类咨询具有高度的遵从性,只要进行了沟通,其他政府机构在终止程序中向国土安全部提供了何种信息并不重要。

    这引发了自由派大法官埃琳娜·卡根一系列越来越难以置信的假设性问题。

    她问道,如果国土安全部部长就叙利亚局势向国务院寻求评估,但从未收到回复,会如何?如果国务院没有回复实地局势信息,反而谈论最近的棒球比赛,又会如何?

    “如果她向国务院寻求意见,就算完成了咨询,”绍尔平淡地回应道,并补充称这符合“咨询”一词的“字面含义”。

    “真的假的?”卡根反驳道,“‘咨询’一词的字面意思难道是,你就某个话题与某人交换意见吗?”

    绍尔坚持己见。他表示,即使国务院完全不予回应,国土安全部部长也已完成了法律要求的所有程序。

    “如果她向国务院寻求意见,”他说,“她就已经完成了咨询。”

    其他国家的TPS身份岌岌可危

    最高法院预计将于6月底前作出裁决,其影响可能波及美国境内超过100万移民,尽管本案仅涉及约35万海地人和6000叙利亚人。

    前总统乔·拜登卸任时,美国已为来自17个国家的公民提供或延长了TPS保护。自特朗普去年再次就职以来,其政府已终止或试图终止所有13个接受审查的国家的TPS身份。

    该政府还采取行动终止南苏丹、叙利亚和埃塞俄比亚等国的TPS身份。其中许多决定仍在联邦法院接受审查,这些案件将在很大程度上取决于最高法院多数派的结论。

    最高法院去年曾在紧急程序 docket 中审查了其中一起案件。在该案中,大法官两次允许特朗普剥夺约30万委内瑞拉人的临时驱逐保护令。

    最高法院未解释其裁决理由。

    杰克逊在其中一项裁决中写下异议书,指责政府试图“尽可能快地颠覆尽可能多的人的生活”。

    CNN记者普里西拉·阿尔瓦雷斯和塔米·卢比对本文亦有贡献。

    Takeaways: Supreme Court signals it will side with Trump on Haitian and Syrian migrants

    2026-04-29T16:41:40.815Z / CNN

    By John Fritze and Devan Cole

    Updated 1 hr 3 min ago

    Updated Apr 29, 2026, 3:16 PM ET

    PUBLISHED Apr 29, 2026, 12:41 PM ET

    A person stands with a placard as immigrants’ rights activists and demonstrators attend a rally outside the U.S. Supreme Court on April 29, 2026.

    Nathan Howard/Reuters

    The Supreme Court indicated Wednesday it will back President Donald Trump’s push to end temporary deportation protections for potentially millions of foreign nationals who hail from countries enduring war and natural disasters.

    In one of the most significant immigration appeals to reach the high court during Trump’s second term, the six-justice conservative majority signaled that it believes federal courts might not even have the power to review legal challenges when an administration turns Temporary Protected Status designations on and off.

    Related live story The US Supreme Court is seen on April 13, 2026. Mariam Zuhaib/AP Supreme Court limits reach of the Voting Rights Act and hears arguments over temporary protected status

    If that is true, it would have profound implications beyond the Haitian and Syrian nationals who challenged Trump’s decision to end TPS for their countries and could effectively bar suits against other decisions.

    More than 1 million immigrants are permitted to live and work in the United States under the program.

    Here are five takeaways from oral arguments:

    Conservatives signal courts have no role

    Several of the conservative justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, focused on the idea that federal courts have no power to review the legality of TPS decisions. That’s because Congress included a provision in the TPS law that makes clear that an administration’s “determinations” are not reviewable.

    “I really don’t understand how you can prevail,” conservative Justice Samuel Alito said, if the court interprets that provision as it has in past decisions.

    Ahilan Arulanantham, the attorney arguing on behalf of Syrian TPS beneficiaries, argued that while a final decision isn’t reviewable, the process that officials used to get there can be challenged

    But Justice Amy Coney Barrett, another conservative, seemed to doubt that.

    “Why would Congress permit review of the procedural aspect when really what everybody cares about is the substance?” she asked.

    The court’s focus on procedure, while technical, is also telling. Because the justices were so dialed in on whether the court could even review the case, they spent far less time talking about whether the Trump administration had violated the law or the Constitution in how it made its decisions.

    Related article Viles Dorsainvil, Executive Director of the Haitian Support Center, and Associate Pastor Brandon Peterson of Greater Grace Temple in Springfield, Ohio, listen to a prayer outside the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC, on March 17, 2026. Roberto Schmidt/AFP/Getty Images Will Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric matter at the Supreme Court? 7 min read

    Trump’s comments matter – but only to the liberals

    Looming large over Trump’s revocation of TPS for Haiti are a history of offensive comments he has made about the island country and its people who have found a home in the US.

    Those comments and similar ones from former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, the official who formally revoked TPS for Haitians last year, factored heavily into a federal judge’s decision to rule that the policy change was motivated at least in part by racial animus. That is important because if the decision to end TPS was made based on race, it would violate the equal protection clause.

    The liberal justices zeroed in on that point Wednesday as they questioned whether the administration’s decision last year was unconstitutionally discriminatory.

    “We have a president say at one point that Haiti is a ‘filthy,’ ‘dirty’ and ‘disgusting’ ‘shithole country,’” Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the court’s senior liberal, said at one point to Solicitor General D. John Sauer. “And where he complained that the United States takes people from such countries instead of people from Norway, Sweden or Denmark.”

    “He declared illegal immigrants, which he associated with TPS, as ‘poisoning the blood’ of America,” Sotomayor said of Trump, adding: “I don’t see how that one statement” doesn’t show a “discriminatory purpose may have played a part in this decision.”

    Sauer responded that the comments from Trump and Noem don’t mention race specifically.

    Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also pressed Sauer to explain how the court was simply supposed to look past Trump’s comments when the lower court that considerd the TPS move did not.

    “The statements about Haiti and eating pets and the names that were called with respect to these immigrants – even though they are lawfully in the United States – those are pretty recent,” she said, referring to Trump’s claims during the 2024 election that Haitian migrants in Ohio were eating dogs. “What do you say about those kinds of things?”

    Sauer said the remarks were “made in different contexts that are remote in time” and are therefore “un-illuminating” for this case.

    The court’s conservatives, however, largely avoided the president’s comments.

    Kavanaugh focuses on present day Syria

    Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a member of the court’s conservative wing appointed by Trump, was one of the only justices who had questions about the administration’s actual decisions.

    But those questions indicated Kavanaugh, who is often a key vote in high-profile cases, agreed with the administration’s decision.

    The Obama administration granted TPS for certain Syrians in 2012 following the crackdown on protesters by former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. That designation was repeatedly extended amid a civil war that erupted there. But Trump officials have noted that the Assad regime fell in 2024, and the Department of Homeland Security announced that it would end the TPS designation last November.

    “It’s not the Assad regime anymore though,” Kavanaugh told an attorney representing the Syrian immigrants. “After 53 years of complete oppression and brutal treatment, it’s gone.”

    Picking up on a line from the administration’s brief, Kavanaugh pressed Arulanantham on how many Syrians had returned to the country on their own.

    “So do you agree the Assad regime change is a significant change in the history of that country and the Middle East more broadly?” he asked.

    “I don’t think it’s as simple as that,” Arulanantham responded.

    But, Arulanantham said, he didn’t need to get into a debate about whether Syria today is safe or not because, he said, the point is the administration did not conduct an adequate review.

    Kagan: ‘I mean, really?’

    One of the central questions in the cases is whether the Department of Homeland Security sufficiently consulted with the State Department about conditions on the ground in the two countries before it moved ahead with terminating the TPS designations. That consultation is required by federal law, but the attorneys representing the TPS recipients said the Trump administration gave that process short shrift.

    In both cases, a DHS lawyer employee emailed a State Department official about the designations, but the communications they received in return simply stated that State has no foreign policy concerns over a termination of TPS for Haiti and Syria.

    Lower courts found that consultation to be far short of what federal law requires DHS to do. But Sauer told the justices that such consultation is highly deferential, and that it didn’t matter what other government agencies told DHS as part of the termination process so long as some communication occurred.

    That prompted a series of increasingly incredulous hypothetical questions from liberal Justice Elena Kagan.

    What if the DHS secretary asked the State Department for an assessment of the conditions in Syria but never received a response, she asked. What if, instead of responding with information about conditions on the ground, the State Department instead responded with thoughts on a recent baseball game?

    “If she sought input from State, she has consulted,” Sauer responded flatly, adding that would full under the “plain meaning” of the word “consulting.”

    “I mean, really?” Kagan shot back. “The plain meaning of the word ‘consultation’ seems to be, like, you consult with somebody on a topic.”

    Sauer held firm. Even if the State Department was completely unresponsive, he said, the Homeland Security secretary had done all that was required under the law.

    “If she sought input from State,” he said, “she has consulted.”

    TPS for other countries at stake

    The court’s decision, which is expected before the end of June, could affect more than 1 million immigrants in the United States, even though the case itself is focused on some 350,000 Haitians and 6,000 Syrians.

    When former President Joe Biden left office, the US had provided — or extended — TPS protections for people from 17 countries.Since Trump returned to office last year, his administration has ended — or attempted to end — TPS designations for all 13 countries that have come up for revie.

    The administration has also moved to end TPS designations for South Sudan, Syria and Ethiopia, among others. Many of those decisions are still being reviewed by federal courts and those cases will heavily influenced by what the Supreme Court majority concludes.

    The Supreme Court reviewed one of those cases last year on its emergency docket. In that case, the justices twice allowed Trump to strip temporary deportation protections from some 300,000 Venezuelans.

    The court did not explain its reasoning.

    Jackson wrote an dissent in one of those decisions accusing the administration of attempting to “disrupt as many lives as possible, as quickly as possible.”

    CNN’s Priscilla Alvarez and Tami Luhby contributed to this report.

  • 鲍威尔称不会做“影子主席”,将尽可能支持沃什


    2026年4月29日 晚上7:18 UTC / 路透社

    节点运行失败

    U.S. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell attends a press conference following a two-day meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), at the U.S. Federal Reserve in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 29, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

    华盛顿,4月29日(路透社)——美国联邦储备委员会主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔当地时间周三表示,他将回归美联储理事岗位,并将尽力支持美联储下任主席人选凯文·沃什,不会试图扮演试图对货币政策施加过大影响力的“影子主席”。

    “那是我绝不会做的事,你懂的,所谓影子主席那套,”鲍威尔在新闻发布会上说道。他还表示,自己将在5月结束主席任期后,在理事会留任一段未明确时长的时间,保持“低调姿态”。

    路透社伊朗简报新闻通讯将为您提供伊朗局势的最新动态与分析。点击此处订阅。

    广告 · 滚动继续阅读

    他表示,在担任主席之前,他曾以理事身份履职六年,深知主席一职在推动理事会达成共识方面的角色与难处。

    “我不想不必要地增加这项工作的难度。这意味着只要可以,我就会尽力支持主席想要推进的方向,”鲍威尔说道。“如果实在做不到,那也没办法。美联储向来都是这么运作的。”

    戴维·劳德 华盛顿报道

    本报守则:路透社汤姆森路透信托原则。

    Powell says he won’t be a shadow chair, would support Warsh where possible

    2026-04-29 7:18 PM UTC / Reuters

    节点运行失败

    U.S. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell attends a press conference following a two-day meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), at the U.S. Federal Reserve in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 29, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

    WASHINGTON, April 29 (Reuters) – U.S. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said on Wednesday that ​he will return to being a ‌Fed governor and will try to support the central bank’s prospective next chair, Kevin ​Warsh, and not try to ​act as a “shadow chair” who attempts to ⁠wield outsized influence over monetary ​policy.

    “That’s just something I would never do, ​you know, the shadow chair thing,” Powell told a news conference, where he said he ​would remain on the board for ​an unspecified period after his chair term ends ‌in ⁠May, keeping a “low profile”.

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

    Advertisement · Scroll to continue

    He said that during his six years as a governor before becoming chair, he understands the ​role and ​the ⁠difficulty that the chair has in bringing the board to ​consensus.

    “I don’t want to add ​to ⁠that unnecessarily. And that means trying support the direction the chair wants to ⁠go, ​if you can,” Powell ​said. “If you can’t, you can’t. That’s the way ​it’s always worked there.”

    Reporting by David Lawder

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

  • 前FBI探员:对科米的指控取决于意图证据和陪审团解读


    2026年4月29日 美国东部时间下午3:37 / 福克斯新闻

    作者:格雷格·韦纳

    前司法部办公厅主任查德·米泽尔做客《福克斯与朋友们早间版》,讨论詹姆斯·科米再次被起诉的原因,以及针对福奇博士顾问的最新指控。

    NEW 您现在可以收听福克斯新闻的文章了!

    前联邦调查局特别探员、福克斯新闻撰稿人、《两个FBI》一书作者妮可·帕克表示,针对前联邦调查局局长詹姆斯·科米的案件可能很难举证,但检察官“当然有可能”获得有罪判决。

    联邦当局指控科米与他们所称的一条威胁总统唐纳德·特朗普的社交媒体帖子有关。

    帕克告诉福克斯新闻数字频道,涉及所谓威胁的案件通常很复杂,尤其是当案件依赖解读而非明确语言时,而且在很大程度上取决于调查人员收集的具体事实和证据。

    “这类案件可能很难提起指控,”帕克说,“我过去也曾提起过此类指控,确实有可能做出有罪判决。没有人能凌驾于法律之上,有罪判决确实会出现。”

    格雷格·贾雷特专栏:奥巴马及其同伙如何炮制特朗普-俄罗斯骗局,以及接下来会发生什么

    詹姆斯·科米在Instagram上发布了一张他站在海滩上的照片。(福克斯新闻)

    科米周二被起诉两项重罪罪名,涉及2025年5月的一条Instagram帖子,帖子中贝壳被摆成“86 47”的字样,检察官认为这可以被解读为对第47任总统特朗普的威胁。

    科米已主动投案并于周三出席联邦法院听证会,他否认有不当行为,并此前将该图片描述为“很酷的贝壳造型”。

    帕克表示,在威胁调查中,探员通常会先收集广泛的证据,再将案件提交给检察官,由检察官决定是否有必要提起指控。她补充说,案件并不总是取决于单一证据,检察官在试图证明犯罪意图时,可能会依赖更广泛的信息。

    预计对科米的案件将在一定程度上取决于检察官能否证明该社交媒体帖子背后的犯罪意图,这一问题已经引起了法律分析师的关注。

    民主党新的“头号敌人”是另一个唐纳德·特朗普

    前联邦调查局局长詹姆斯·科米在议员面前发表讲话。(切里斯·梅/盖蒂图片社,资料图)

    帕克还指出,案件的审理地点会对案件走向产生重大影响,尤其是在陪审团如何解读证据方面。

    她补充说,在高度极化的环境中,审理地点会影响案件的审理结果,这是决定案件最终结果的一个重要因素。

    “在一个完美的国家,检方应该能够向全国任何一个陪审团出示证据,并严格根据证据做出裁决,”她说,“比以往任何时候都更重要的是,审理地点确实很重要,因为在我们国家目前的极化状态下——重要的不只是出示了什么证据,而是在哪里出示证据。”

    参议员林赛·格雷厄姆专栏:科米领导的FBI在反特朗普运动中调查了我和8名同事

    前联邦调查局局长詹姆斯·科米在弗吉尼亚州出庭受审的法庭素描,2025年10月8日。(联邦法院,素描画家达娜·弗库特伦)

    此案将在北卡罗来纳州东区审理,该审理地点可能会影响陪审团对证据的评估方式。

    曾在FBI工作期间受科米领导的帕克表示,她认为科米与特朗普的过往为这起案件提供了重要背景。

    “联邦调查局内部许多人认为,科米自尊心受损,从未摆脱2017年5月在洛杉矶分局出差期间被唐纳德·特朗普总统解雇的事实,”帕克说,“许多人认为科米局长傲慢自大、不可一世。”

    格雷格·贾雷特专栏:检察官是否应该因针对特朗普的诉讼战而被起诉?

    前联邦调查局局长詹姆斯·科米在参议院情报委员会作证。(切里斯·梅/努罗索 via 盖蒂图片社,资料图)

    她补充说,在她看来,作为案件核心的这条社交媒体帖子越过了界限,尤其是考虑到科米曾担任联邦调查局局长一职。

    “就在科米发布‘86 47’贝壳Instagram帖子的同一时间段,他在X平台上发布了一则关于其最新悬疑小说即将出版的公告。如果他只是想为自己的书造势,这条帖子就太荒谬了,”帕克说,“前联邦调查局局长本应更清楚这一点。”

    “他在起诉书中声称自己对这些指控无罪,但科米似乎从不知道适可而止,”她补充道。

    点击此处下载福克斯新闻应用程序

    帕克表示,围绕意图和解读的问题在威胁相关案件中很常见,最终将由法院根据全部证据做出裁决。

    随着案件推进,科米预计将对指控提出抗辩,这场法律之战可能会考验法院如何解读社交媒体上的言论,以及如何划定受保护言论与刑事威胁之间的界限。

    格雷格·韦纳是福克斯新闻数字频道突发新闻记者。

    新闻线索和创意可发送至Greg.Wehner@Fox.com,或在Twitter上@GregWehner。

    https://www.foxnews.com/video/6394156927112

    Former FBI agent says Comey charges hinge on intent evidence and jury interpretation

    April 29, 2026 3:37pm EDT / Fox News

    By Greg Wehner

    Chad Mizelle, former DOJ chief of staff, joined ‘Fox & Friends First’ to discuss why James Comey was indicted again and the latest on charges targeting Dr. Fauci’s advisor.

    NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Nicole Parker, a former FBI special agent, Fox News contributor and author of “The Two FBIs,” said the case against former FBI Director James Comey could be difficult to prove, though “certainly possible” for prosecutors to secure a conviction.

    Federal authorities have charged Comey in connection with a social media post they say threatened President Donald Trump.

    Parker told Fox News Digital that cases involving alleged threats are often complex, particularly when they rely on interpretation rather than explicit language, and depend heavily on the specific facts and evidence gathered by investigators.

    “These cases may be difficult to charge,” Parker said. “I have charged them before in the past, and it is certainly possible to come up with guilty verdicts. No one is above the law, and guilty verdicts do come down the pipeline.”

    GREGG JARRETT:HOW OBAMA AND CRONIES CREATED TRUMP-RUSSIA HOAX, AND WHAT HAPPENS NEXT

    James Comey posted a photo on Instagram showing him standing on a beach.(Fox News)

    Comey was indicted Tuesday on two felony counts related to a May 2025 Instagram post showing seashells arranged to form “86 47,” which prosecutors argue could be interpreted as a threat against Trump, the 47th president.

    Comey, who self-surrendered and appeared in federal court Wednesday, has denied wrongdoing and previously described the image as a “cool shell formation.”

    Parker said that in threat investigations, agents typically gather a wide range of evidence before presenting a case to prosecutors, who then determine whether charges are warranted. She added that cases do not always hinge on a single piece of evidence, and that prosecutors may rely on a broader body of information when attempting to establish intent.

    The case against Comey is expected to hinge in part on whether prosecutors can demonstrate intent behind the social media post, an issue that has already drawn scrutiny from legal analysts.

    DEMOCRATS’ NEW BOOGEYMAN IS A DIFFERENT KIND OF DONALD TRUMP

    Former FBI director James Comey speaks before lawmakers.(Cheriss May/Getty Images, File)

    Parker also noted that where a case is tried can play a significant role in how it unfolds, particularly when it comes to how juries interpret evidence.

    She added that venue can influence how a case is received, especially in a highly polarized environment, making it an important factor in how cases are ultimately decided.

    “In a perfect country, the prosecution should be able to present evidence to any jury nationwide and receive a verdict based strictly on the evidence,” she said. “More than ever before, venue does matter because in this current state of polarization in our nation – it is not just what evidence is presented but where the evidence is presented.”

    SEN LINDSEY GRAHAM: COMEY’S FBI INVESTIGATED ME AND 8 COLLEAGUES IN ANTI-TRUMP CRUSADE

    Former FBI Director James Comey appears in a courtroom sketch during his arraignment in Virginia, Oct. 8, 2025.(Federal Court, sketch artist Dana Verkouteren)

    The case is being brought in the Eastern District of North Carolina, a venue that could factor into how the evidence is evaluated by a jury.

    Parker, who worked under Comey during her time at the FBI, said she believes his history with Trump provides important context surrounding the case.

    “Many from the bureau believe Comey has a bruised ego and has never gotten over the fact that he was fired in May 2017 by President Donald Trump while on a trip to the Los Angeles Field Office,” Parker said. “Director Comey was perceived by many as arrogant and untouchable.”

    GREGG JARRETT: SHOULD PROSECUTORS BE PROSECUTED FOR THEIR LAWFARE CAMPAIGN AGAINST TRUMP?

    Former FBI Director James Comey testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee.(Cheriss May/NurPhoto via Getty Images, File)

    She added that, in her view, the social media post at the center of the case crossed a line, particularly given Comey’s former role leading the FBI.

    “Around the same time frame of Comey’s ‘86 47’ seashell Instagram post, he posted an announcement on X regarding his latest mystery novel that was coming out. This would have been a ridiculous post if he was simply trying to drum up attention for his book,” Parker said. “A former FBI director should know better than this.”

    “He claims innocence regarding these allegations in the indictment, but it seems that Comey never knew when to stop,” she added.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    Parker said questions surrounding intent and interpretation are common in threat-related cases and are ultimately decided in court based on the totality of the evidence.

    As the case moves forward, Comey is expected to contest the charges, setting up a legal battle that could test how courts interpret statements made on social media and where the line is drawn between protected speech and criminal threats.

    Greg Wehner is a breaking news reporter for Fox News Digital.

    Story tips and ideas can be sent to Greg.Wehner@Fox.com and on Twitter @GregWehner.

    https://www.foxnews.com/video/6394156927112

  • 从胸针到女王的iPod:美英两国互赠礼物的历史


    2026-04-29T13:04:00-0400 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
    作者:马克·奥斯本
    更新于:2026年4月29日 / 美国东部时间下午1:06 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻

    美国虽诞生于对英国君主的反抗,但两国如今拥有悠久的外交关系。而友谊怎能少了礼物往来?

    近两个世纪以来,总统与君主们一直在外交出访期间互赠礼物。有些礼物曾引发争议——比如2008年乔治·W·布什赠送给伊丽莎白二世女王一辆高尔夫球车大小的电动汽车——也有些礼物恰到好处——比如本周二查尔斯国王赠送给特朗普总统的英国“特朗普号”潜艇船钟。

    英国送给美国总统最著名、也最持久的礼物当属“坚毅号书桌”。这张自1880年起就摆放在白宫的标志性书桌,是维多利亚女王赠送给拉瑟福德·B·海斯总统的礼物。书桌由英国“坚毅号”军舰的木材制成,该舰曾被困冰层并被遗弃,1855年被美国捕鲸船发现。美国方面将其修复后归还英国,1879年该舰退役后,工匠们用其木料打造了这张坚毅号书桌。

    白宫椭圆形办公室内的坚毅号书桌铭牌。布鲁克斯·克拉夫特有限责任公司/考比斯图片社 via 盖蒂图片社

    自海斯总统以来,除林登·约翰逊、理查德·尼克松和杰拉尔德·福特外,每位美国总统都曾使用过这张书桌。(它曾被借给展览,直到吉米·卡特1977年要求将其取回,摆放在自己的椭圆形办公室中。)

    2013年11月27日,美国总统巴拉克·奥巴马在白宫椭圆形办公室的坚毅号书桌上签署法案成为法律。奇普·索莫德维拉/盖蒂图片社

    奥巴马夫妇时期

    2011年5月,奥巴马夫妇拜访伊丽莎白女王和爱丁堡公爵时,奥巴马总统收到了一批维多利亚女王与历任美国总统往来的书信集,而维多利亚女王正是女王的曾曾祖母。这些书信中包括1834年约翰·昆西·亚当斯写给当时还是公主的维多利亚的信件,以及维多利亚在丈夫亚伯拉罕·林肯遇刺后写给玛丽·托德·林肯的吊唁信。

    2011年5月24日,巴拉克·奥巴马总统与伊丽莎白二世女王在伦敦白金汉宫的国宴上交谈。rota/安瓦尔·侯赛因/盖蒂图片社

    两年前,奥巴马总统送给女王一台iPod的举动曾登上新闻头条。在2011年的这次访问中,奥巴马夫妇还赠送给女王一本皮面相册,里面收录了女王父母——乔治六世国王和伊丽莎白王后——1939年访美时的罕见纪念品和照片。

    特朗普时期

    特朗普先生是英国王室的知名仰慕者。他以总统身份首次正式访问英国是在2018年7月。此次出访期间,特朗普总统赠送给伊丽莎白女王一尊锡制骏马——多年来美国赠送给伊丽莎白和菲利普亲王的马术相关礼物中,这只是其中之一。

    特朗普总统在第一任期内三次到访英国,第二任期内也已到访过一次。

    2026年4月28日,在白宫举行的国宴上,特朗普总统与英国国王查尔斯三世站在“特朗普号”潜艇的原船钟旁微笑。该潜艇属于二战时期的T级潜艇,刻有“Trump 1944”字样,是国王赠予的礼物。亨利·尼科尔斯/法新社 via 盖蒂图片社

    本周二,查尔斯国王送给特朗普一份惊喜礼物:“特朗普号”潜艇的船钟,该艇是1944年下水的T级潜艇。“Trump”这个名字实际上并非指某个人名,而是意为“号角、王牌”。二战前后建造的全部53艘T级潜艇,名字均以字母T开头——从“金枪鱼号”“风暴号”到“嗨吼号”“踮脚号”不一而足。

    2026年4月28日,在白宫国宴上展出的查尔斯三世赠送给特朗普总统的“特朗普号”潜艇船钟。亚伦·乔恩/PA图片社 via 盖蒂图片社

    “特朗普号”潜艇为英国立下汗马功劳,成功度过二战,最终于1971年被拆解报废。

    卡米拉王后在本周访美时也准备了一份惊喜。人们看到她佩戴了一枚带有英国国旗和美国星条旗图案的胸针,这枚胸针是1957年伊丽莎白女王首次访美时收到的礼物。

    2026年4月27日,卡米拉王后抵达美国进行访问时佩戴了一枚印有英美两国国旗的胸针。这枚胸针曾是赠送给伊丽莎白女王的礼物。奇普·索莫德维拉/盖蒂图片社

    From a brooch to the queen’s iPod: A history of gifts between the U.S. and U.K.

    2026-04-29T13:04:00-0400 / CBS News

    By Mark Osborne

    Updated on: April 29, 2026 / 1:06 PM EDT / CBS News

    The U.S. might have been born out of rebellion against a British monarch, but the two countries now also have a long history of diplomatic relations. And what’s a friendship without gift-giving?

    Presidents and monarches have been exchanging gifts on diplomatic trips for nearly two centuries. Some gifts have been infamous — such as George W. Bush gifting Queen Elizabeth II a golf cart-size electric vehicle in 2008 — while others have hit just the right note — such as King Charles’ gift on Tuesday to President Trump of a bell from the British submarine HMS Trump.

    The most famous — and lasting — gift from the U.K. to a U.S. president was the Resolute Desk. The desk, which has been a centerpiece of the White House since 1880, was gifted from Queen Victoria to President Rutherford B. Hayes. The desk was made from the wood of the HMS Resolute, a British ship that became stuck in ice and abandoned before being discovered by an American whaling ship in 1855. It was refurbished and given back to England, and the Resolute Desk was crafted after the ship was decommissioned in 1879.

    A plaque on the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office at the White House. Brooks Kraft LLC/Corbis via Getty Images

    The Resolute Desk has been used by every president since Hayes except Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. (It had been loaned to an exhibition until Jimmy Carter requested it for his Oval Office in 1977.)

    President Barack Obama signs bills into law on the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office at the White House, Nov. 27, 2013. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

    The Obamas

    When the Obamas made a visit to see Queen Elizabeth and the Duke of Edinburgh in May 2011, President Obama received a collection of presidential letters to and from Queen Victoria, the queen’s great-great-grandmother. Among the letters was one from John Quincy Adams to then-Princess Victoria in 1834. There was also a letter from Victoria to Mary Todd Lincoln following the assassination of her husband Abraham Lincoln.

    President Barack Obama and Queen Elizabeth II chat during a State Banquet ay Buckingham Palace on May 24, 2011, in London. rota/Anwar Hussein/Getty Images

    Two years earlier, President Obama made headlines when he gifted the queen an iPod. At the 2011 visit, the Obamas gave the queen a leather-bound album with rare memorabilia and photographs from her parents’ King George VI and Queen Elizabeth’s 1939 visit to the United States.

    The Trumps

    Mr. Trump is a well-known admirer of the British royal family. He made his first official visit to the U.K. as president in July 2018. On that trip, the president gifted Queen Elizabeth with a pewter horse — one of many equestrian-related gifts the U.S. presented to Elizabeth and Prince Philip over the years.

    Mr. Trump visited the royal family three times during his first term, and has already visited once in his second term.

    President Trump and Britain’s King Charles III smile beside the original bell from the HMS Trump, a World War II-era submarine inscribed “Trump 1944,” a gift from the king, during a state dinner at the White House on April 28, 2026. Henry Nicholls /AFP via Getty Images

    King Charles surprised Mr. Trump on Tuesday with the gift of a bell from the HMS Trump, a T-class submarine launched in 1944. The name Trump doesn’t actually refer to a person’s name but the word “trump.” All 53 T-class submarines, built leading up to and after World War II, received names beginning with T — everything from Tuna and Tempest to Tally-Ho and Tiptoe.

    The bell from HMS Trump, gifted by King Charles III to President Trump, at the state dinner at the White House on April 28, 2026. Aaron Chown/PA Images via Getty Images

    The HMS Trump had a good term of service for the U.K., surviving the war and eventually being scrapped in 1971.

    Queen Camilla had a surprise of her own when she arrived in the U.S. for this week’s visit. She was seen wearing a brooch with the Union Jack and Stars and Stripes flags presented to Queen Elizabeth on her first visit to the United States in 1957.

    Queen Camilla wore a brooch with the U.S. and U.K. flags as she landed in the U.S. for a visit on April 27, 2026. It had been a gift to Queen Elizabeth. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

  • 美国司法部试图放宽枪支管制措施,距特朗普遇刺未遂事件仅数日


    2026-04-29T19:24:44.324Z / 美国有线电视新闻网(CNN)

    作者:霍姆斯·莱布兰德、汉娜·拉比诺维茨
    36分钟前发布 | 2026年4月29日美国东部时间下午3:24发布


    2015年10月,人们在弗吉尼亚州尚蒂伊举行的“全国枪支展”上查看手枪。
    贾宾·博茨福德/《华盛顿邮报》/盖蒂图片社/资料图

    在一名枪手持合法购买的枪支冲击白宫记者晚宴安保人员、调查人员称其企图行刺总统唐纳德·特朗普数日后,他领导下的美国司法部正寻求进一步放宽枪支管制措施。

    “我们正在废除那些超出法律允许范围的规则,”代理司法部长托德·布兰奇周三在新闻发布会上表示,“我们正在削减不必要的繁文缛节,用清晰直白的语言取代混乱,这样普通美国人不必拥有法律学位就能理解自己的权利。”

    布兰奇称,本届政府将提出34项新规则——这是酒精、烟草、火器与爆炸物管理局(ATF)“近15年来累计发布的”最大规模规则修订,他补充道:“我们今天所做的一切都不会削弱执法力度。”

    据布兰奇和 newly confirmed ATF Director Robert Cekada,新规则将帮助枪支卖家更轻松地遵守法律,包括采用更严格的合格持证卖家定义。

    塞卡达还表示,ATF将正式废除2023年出台的手枪支架限制规则。该规则已被联邦法院推翻。

    布兰奇发言时,枪支行业领袖站在他身后。

    本届政府长期以来一直在寻找修订现行枪支管制法律的途径。

    特朗普连任数周后,签署了一项行政命令,要求司法部审查拜登政府此前出台的所有与枪支相关的法规或“行动”,并“消除对美国人第二修正案权利的一切侵犯”。

    在这项行政命令中,特朗普声称拜登政府针对以售卖枪支为业的人群,也就是联邦 firearms licensees,他称这“导致针对这些卖家的执法行动增加了近六倍”。

    乔·拜登总统对联邦 firearms licensees 采取的“零容忍”政策,旨在吊销那些未进行背景调查、向非法买家售枪以及存在其他违法违规行为的卖家的执照。

    “枪支制造商仅仅因为生产枪支——这让美国人能够行使一项宪法权利——就被取消银行服务资格或被拒绝提供其他服务,”特朗普去年2月签署的行政命令中写道。

    周六,特朗普本人成为枪手的袭击目标,调查人员称。

    科尔·托马斯·艾伦携带枪支冲入华盛顿特区白宫记者晚宴的安保区域后被捕。据称,袭击发生前后,他曾给家人发送过表达反特朗普情绪的信件。

    “我要重申,在特朗普政府治下,第二修正案永远不会被视为二等权利,”布兰奇说。

    本文为正在跟进的报道,将持续更新。

    Justice Department seeks to roll back gun control measures days after Trump assassination attempt

    2026-04-29T19:24:44.324Z / CNN

    By Holmes Lybrand, Hannah Rabinowitz

    36 min ago
    PUBLISHED Apr 29, 2026, 3:24 PM ET

    People look at handguns during The Nation’s Gun Show in Chantilly, Virginia, in October 2015.

    Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post/Getty Images/File

    Days after a gunman charged security at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in what investigators say was an attempt to kill President Donald Trump with legally owned firearms, his Justice Department is seeking to further roll back gun control measures.

    “We’re repealing rules that went beyond what the law allows,” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said Wednesday at a press conference. “We are cutting unnecessary red tape, and we are replacing confusion with clear, straightforward language so that everyday Americans don’t need a law degree just to understand their rights.”

    The administration is proposing 34 new rules — mark the largest amount the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has issued “in the last 15 years combined,” Blanche said, adding that “nothing we are doing today weakens law enforcement.”

    According to Blanche and the newly confirmed ATF Director Robert Cekada, the new rules will help gun sellers more easily abide by the law, including by adopting a more narrow definition of who must be a licensed seller.

    Cekada also said the ATF would formally rescind a 2023 rule that restricted pistol braces. That rule was struck down in federal court.

    Gun industry leaders stood behind Blanche as he spoke.

    The administration has long been looking for ways to review current gun control laws.

    Weeks after entering his second term, Trump signed an executive order requiring the Justice Department to review any regulations or “actions by the Biden Administration regarding firearms” and “to eliminate all infringements on Americans’ Second Amendment rights.”

    In the executive order, Trump alleged the Biden administration went after people who sell firearms as part of their livelihood, known as federal firearms licensees, which Trump said “led to a nearly six-fold increase in enforcement actions against” those sellers.

    President Joe Biden’s “zero-tolerance” policy for FFLs was meant to revoke licenses from sellers who failed to conduct background checks, sold firearms to an unlawful buyer, and other violations of the law.

    “Firearms manufacturers have been de-banked or denied services simply because they make guns — which allow Americans to exercise a constitutional right,” Trump’s executive order from February last year said.

    On Saturday, Trump himself was a target of a gunman, investigators say.

    Cole Tomas Allen was arrested after rushing through security at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington, DC, armed with guns. He allegedly sent a note to his family sharing anti-Trump sentiment around the time of the attack.

    “Let me reiterate that the Second Amendment will never be treated as a second-class right in the Trump administration,” Blanche said.

    This is a developing story and will be updated.

  • 前联邦调查局局长詹姆斯·科米自首并出庭,因涉嫌威胁特朗普


    2026-04-29T16:56:39.583Z / 美国有线电视新闻网(CNN)

    作者:汉娜·拉宾诺维茨、霍姆斯·莱布兰德、凯特琳·波兰茨、艾米丽·康登

    更新于3小时前
    2026年4月29日,美国东部时间下午1:13更新
    发布于2026年4月29日,美国东部时间中午12:56

    image
    迪亚·迪帕苏皮尔/盖蒂图片社

    前联邦调查局局长詹姆斯·科米于周三向执法部门自首,随后在弗吉尼亚州东区联邦法院首次出庭。

    科米被控通过在北卡罗来纳州一处海滩拍摄贝壳来威胁总统唐纳德·特朗普,在持续不到10分钟的简短听证会结束后,他被准予无条件离开法庭。

    “我看不出这次有必要设置保释条件,”法官威廉·菲茨帕特里克说道,并指出去年司法部首次试图对科米提起诉讼时,并未设置任何保释条件。

    科米于周二遭到最新起诉,此事正值代理司法部长托德·布兰奇加快推进总统公开推动的案件之际。

    这一新案件代表着为满足特朗普要求而展开的新一轮行动,特朗普要求调查包括科米在内的政敌,他认为科米是所谓“动用司法系统对付他”的核心人物之一。

    相关视频

    这位前联邦调查局局长周二因在社交媒体帖子中涉嫌对唐纳德·特朗普总统发出“威胁”而被起诉。美国有线电视新闻网的凯特琳·波兰茨解释了科米的帖子含义,以及这为何是他在特朗普政府时期第二次面临指控。CNN 詹姆斯·科米为何成为热搜话题 1:42

    科米目前被控威胁总统以及在州际商业活动中传递威胁信息。

    该案由北卡罗来纳州东区联邦法院管辖,但科米的首次出庭安排在弗吉尼亚州亚历山大市的一家法院,因为该地点离他的住所更近。

    周二,科米从被告专用的侧门进出法庭。他身着深色西装,在听证会上未发一言。

    周三的庭审中,他未被要求进行答辩。

    不过,科米的律师告诉法官,他们计划提交动议,指控司法部对其当事人进行选择性报复性起诉。

    科米的传讯会或北卡罗来纳州的首次出庭日期尚未确定。

    负责监督这起将迁至北卡罗来纳州新伯尔尼联邦法院审理的案件的北卡罗来纳州东区联邦检察官埃利斯·博伊尔周三出席了庭审。

    所谓的威胁

    周二的起诉书主要针对科米去年5月在社交媒体上发布的一张照片:照片中海滩上的贝壳组成了数字“86 47”。他在配文中写道:“我在海滩散步时发现的有趣贝壳造型。”

    帖子发布后不久,共和党人和政府官员就开始批评科米,称此举相当于对总统唐纳德·特朗普发出死亡威胁。

    作为俚语使用时,数字86可以指摆脱、丢弃某物。特朗普目前是美国第47任总统。

    相关报道

    纽约,2023年5月30日: 2023年5月30日,詹姆斯·科米在纽约市92NY与美国全国广播公司新闻台主持人尼科尔·华莱士对谈活动中登台发言。(摄影:迪亚·迪帕苏皮尔/盖蒂图片社) 迪亚·迪帕苏皮尔/盖蒂图片社/档案照片 独家:前联邦调查局局长詹姆斯·科米因涉嫌对特朗普发出“威胁”而被起诉 阅读时长:6分钟

    “这不会不了了之。这显然不属于应受惩罚的威胁,”斯坦福大学胡佛研究所资深研究员、专攻第一修正案法律的尤金·沃洛克周二告诉美国有线电视新闻网。

    这是特朗普执政时期司法部第二次对科米提起诉讼。

    去年9月,司法部首次对科米提起诉讼,指控他就向媒体泄密一事向国会撒谎。

    去年年底,一名联邦法官驳回了该案,理由是弗吉尼亚州东区临时联邦检察官的任命程序不合规,该检察官绕过了参议院的批准流程。

    本文更新了来自听证会的更多信息。

    Former FBI Director James Comey surrenders and appears in court over alleged threat against Trump

    2026-04-29T16:56:39.583Z / CNN

    By Hannah Rabinowitz, Holmes Lybrand, Katelyn Polantz, Emily Condon

    Updated 3 hr ago
    Updated Apr 29, 2026, 1:13 PM ET
    PUBLISHED Apr 29, 2026, 12:56 PM ET

    James Comey speaks onstage during Former FBI Director James Comey In Conversation With MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace at 92NY in New York City, on May 30, 2023.

    Dia Dipasupil/Getty Images

    Former FBI Director James Comey surrendered Wednesday to law enforcement before his first appearance in federal court in the Eastern District of Virginia.

    Comey, who is charged with making a threat against President Donald Trump by photographing seashells on a North Carolina beach, was allowed to leave court with no conditions of release after a brief hearing that lasted less than 10 minutes.

    “I don’t see why they’d be necessary this time,” Judge William Fitzpatrick said, noting that there were no conditions set when the Justice Department first attempted to bring a case against Comey last year.

    Comey’s latest indictment, which was brought Tuesday, comes as acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has picked up the pace in bringing cases that the president has publicly jockeyed for.

    The new case represents a reinvigorated effort to satisfy Trump’s demands to investigate his foes, including Comey, who he sees as a key leader in the perceived effort to “weaponize” the justice system against him.

    Related video The former FBI director was indicted Tuesday over an alleged “threat” to President Donald Trump made in a social media post. CNN’s Katelyn Polantz explains what Comey’s post meant and why this is his second time facing charges under the Trump administration. CNN Why James Comey is trending 1:42

    Comey is now charged with making a threat against the president and transmitting a threat in interstate commerce.

    The charges were brought in the Eastern District of North Carolina, but Comey’s first appearance was in a courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia as it’s closer to his home.

    On Tuesday, Comey entered and exited the courtroom through a side entrance used by defendants. He wore a dark suit and did not speak during the hearing.

    He was not asked to enter a plea on Wednesday.

    Comey’s attorneys, however, told the judge they plan to file motions accusing the Justice Department of selectively and vindictively prosecuting their client.

    No date has been set for Comey’s arraignment or first appearance in North Carolina.

    The US Attorney from the Eastern District of North Carolina, Ellis Boyle, who will be overseeing this case as it moves to the federal court in New Bern, NC, was in the courtroom Wednesday.

    The threat

    Tuesday’s indictment is centered on a picture Comey posted on social media last May, of shells on a beach writing out the numbers “86 47.” He wrote in the caption, “Cool shell formation on my beach walk.”

    Almost immediately following his post, Republicans and administration officials began criticizing Comey for what they said amounted to a death threat against President Donald Trump.

    When used as slang, the number 86 can refer to getting rid of or tossing something out. Trump is currently the 47th president.

    Related article NEW YORK, NEW YORK – MAY 30: James Comey speaks onstage during Former FBI Director James Comey In Conversation With MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace at 92NY on May 30, 2023 in New York City. (Photo by Dia Dipasupil/Getty Images) Dia Dipasupil/Getty Images/File Exclusive: Former FBI Director James Comey indicted over alleged ‘threat’ against Trump 6 min read

    “This is not going anywhere. This is clearly not a punishable threat,” Eugene Volokh, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University who specializes in First Amendment law, told CNN Tuesday.

    This is the second time that Trump’s Justice Department brought charges against Comey.

    In September of last year, the Justice Department first brought charges against Comey, accusing him of lying to Congress over leaks to the press.

    The case was dismissed late last year by a federal judge who found that the interim US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia had been improperly appointed, having skirted approval from the Senate.

    This story was updated with additional information from the hearing.

  • 美联储连续第三次会议维持利率不变,鲍威尔承诺将留任理事


    2026年4月29日 / 美国东部时间下午4:08 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻

    美联储主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔周三表示,他计划在5月任期结束后继续担任美联储理事。这一宣布是在美联储再次维持基准利率不变之际作出的,此前伊朗战争推高了通胀。

    鲍威尔此前曾表示,他将留任美联储主席,直至司法部结束对他监管美联储华盛顿特区总部翻新工程的调查,他称此次调查具有政治动机。哥伦比亚特区美国检察官珍妮娜·皮尔罗4月24日表示,其办公室将结束对鲍威尔的调查。

    “我在等待调查彻底结束,做到透明且有最终结果,”鲍威尔周三在新闻发布会上被问及何时会卸任美联储理事一职时说道。

    “美联储机构正遭受重创”

    鲍威尔补充称,他担忧美联储在政治挑战下维持独立性的能力,比如特朗普总统试图解雇美联储理事丽莎·库克。最高法院预计将于今年晚些时候就总统是否有权罢免美联储官员作出裁决。

    “美联储机构正遭受重创——我们不得不诉诸法庭,”鲍威尔说道,“事情还没有结束。”

    鲍威尔表示,美联储在不受政治压力的情况下制定政策的能力,对于维持低通胀和充分就业至关重要,这也是美联储双重使命的两个方面。

    “你希望人们制定货币政策、设定利率时以公众利益为出发点,只专注于此,忽略政治考量,”他说道,“这无关两党合作——这是无党派立场。”

    Bankrate金融分析师斯蒂芬·凯茨指出,鲍威尔选择留任美联储理事,突显了他对维护美联储独立性的承诺。

    “这与主席在任期结束后离职的惯例大相径庭,堪称大胆之举,”凯茨在一封电子邮件中说道,“鲍威尔从未回避直面政治和法律压力,这一举动表明,他仍将通过继续履职,坚定致力于维护美联储的独立性。”

    通胀高企

    鲍威尔发表上述言论之际,美联储将联邦基金利率——即银行间短期拆借利率——维持在当前3.5%至3.75%的区间内。投资者普遍预计美联储会维持利率不变,芝加哥商品交易所联邦观察工具预测官员们维持当前利率的概率为100%。

    在解释维持当前利率的决定时,负责制定利率政策的联邦公开市场委员会(FOMC)指出,中东局势发展导致“经济前景高度不确定”。美联储还表示,“高企”的通胀与“近期全球能源价格上涨”有关。

    特朗普提名的接替鲍威尔担任主席的人选凯文·沃什将于5月15日任期结束后接手美联储,届时美联储将面临多重压力:从特朗普总统反复要求降息,到上月通胀率跃升至近两年来的最高水平。由于降息可能刺激通胀,许多经济学家如今预测美联储将推迟到2026年晚些时候甚至2027年才会降息。

    “联邦公开市场委员会符合市场预期,今日维持利率不变,”穆迪评级首席信贷官阿特西·谢思在一封电子邮件中说道,“随着中东冲突的影响愈发显著,维持政策利率的理由在于通胀风险上升,而美国经济增长风险目前看来得到了控制。”

    在声明中,联邦公开市场委员会重申了实现2%年度通胀率的目标。3月份消费者价格指数为3.3%。

    鲍威尔指出,美联储认为当前的基准利率为经济形势变化提供了调整空间,不过他补充道,“目前没有人呼吁加息”。

    “我们认为当前处于有利位置,可以向任何方向调整政策,”他说道。

    异议委员

    四名联邦公开市场委员会成员对美联储的声明投下反对票,其中美联储理事斯蒂芬·米兰投票支持降息0.25个百分点。另外三名成员支持维持当前利率,但反对声明中暗示倾向于降息的措辞。

    “但值得注意的是,新闻稿仍提到委员会‘将考虑对利率进行额外调整的范围和时机’,因此维持了未来进一步降息的倾向,”惠誉评级首席经济学家布莱恩·科尔顿在一封电子邮件中指出,“考虑到油价冲击,这份措辞显然引发了激烈辩论,有三名成员决定不支持在声明中加入宽松倾向的表述。”

    被问及异议票时,鲍威尔表示,他认为鉴于经济面临的挑战,这是自然结果。

    “我们正处于异常艰难的处境,”他说道,“我们遭遇了四次供给冲击:新冠疫情、乌克兰入侵、关税政策,如今又是伊朗问题和油价飙升。”

    他补充道:“每一次供给冲击都有可能推高通胀和失业率。央行真的很难判断何为正确之举。”

    2026年不会降息?

    美联储上一次降息是在2025年12月,当时消费者价格指数同比为2.7%——高于美联储2%的目标,但较2022年6月疫情期间9.1%的峰值大幅下降。

    自2月28日伊朗战争爆发以来,全球能源价格飙升,周三美国普通汽油均价升至每加仑4.23美元,比冲突前高出约1.25美元。据FactSet数据,经济学家目前预测,由于油气价格上涨,4月份通胀率同比可能跃升至3.9%。

    牛津经济研究院在4月28日的一份报告中指出,高能源成本正导致一些美国消费者推迟购买大宗商品。

    “我们预计油价上涨将打击消费者实际可支配收入增长,对耐用品和非必需服务支出造成最大拖累,”这家投资咨询公司说道。

    消费支出下滑将对经济构成风险,因为美国国内生产总值每1美元中就有70美分来自消费者购买。

    鲍威尔表示,到目前为止美国经济仍具韧性,但美联储正密切关注消费者是否会因汽油和能源价格上涨而缩减开支。

    就业增长不均衡

    美联储也在密切关注劳动力市场,该市场因经济不确定性、薪资增长不均衡以及人工智能的出现而陷入停滞。

    一些公司已宣布大规模裁员,理由是人工智能,但经济学家表示,目前该技术似乎并未导致大范围裁员。

    就业市场疲软的迹象可能会说服一些美联储官员下调针对消费者和企业的借贷成本。鲍威尔最近将就业市场描述为相对平衡,同时承认年轻大学毕业生在找工作方面面临障碍。

    “美联储对劳动力市场状况,尤其是薪资压力和招聘需求的任何措辞调整,都可能对未来利率政策的预期产生影响,”美银理财首席市场策略师安东尼·萨格林本在4月27日的研究报告中指出。

    Fed holds interest rates steady for third straight meeting, as Powell vows to remain as governor

    April 29, 2026 / 4:08 PM EDT / CBS News

    Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said on Wednesday that he plans to remain as a board governor after his term ends in May, announcing the move after the central bank again left its benchmark interest rate unchanged amid rising inflation due to the Iran war.

    Powell had previously said he would stay on as Fed chair until the Department of Justice ended an investigation into his oversight of renovations of the Fed’s Washington, D.C., headquarters, calling the inquiry politically motivated. Jeanine Pirro, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, said on April 24 that her office would end the probe into Powell.

    “I’m waiting for the investigation to be well and truly over with transparency and finality,” Powell said on Wednesday when asked in a press conference when he would leave his post as a Fed governor.

    “The institution is battered”

    Powell added that he is concerned about the Fed’s ability to maintain its independence amid political challenges, such as President Trump’s attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling later this year on whether the president has the authority to remove a Federal Reserve official.

    “The institution is battered — we have had to go to the courts,” Powell said. “It’s not over.”

    Powell said the central bank’s ability to set policy without political pressure is essential to maintaining low inflation and full employment, the two sides of the Fed’s dual mandate.

    “You want people to make monetary policy and set interest rates to benefit the general public, and focus only on that and ignore political considerations,” he said. “This isn’t bipartisan — it’s nonpartisan.”

    Powell’s decision to remain as a Fed governor underlines his commitment to preserving the central bank’s independence, noted Bankrate financial analyst Stephen Kates.

    “This is a bold departure from the norm of chairs exiting after their chairmanship term ends,” Kates said in an email. “Powell has not shied away from facing political and legal pressure head-on, and this move signals that he remains steadfast in his commitment to preserving Fed independence through continued service.”

    Elevated inflation

    Powell’s remarks came as the Fed maintained the federal funds rate — what banks charge each other for short-term loans — in its current range of 3.5% to 3.75%. The decision to keep rates steady was widely expected by investors, with the CME FedWatch tool forecasting a 100% probability that officials would maintain the current rate.

    In explaining its decision to maintain the current rate, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), the Fed’s rate-setting panel, cited developments in the Middle East in pointing to “a high level of uncertainty about the economic outlook.” The central bank also said “elevated” inflation is tied to the “recent increase in global energy prices.”

    Kevin Warsh, Mr. Trump’s nominee to replace Powell after his term as chair ends on May 15, will inherit a Federal Reserve facing pressures ranging from President Trump’s repeated demands for lower interest rates to an inflation reading that jumped last month to its highest level in almost two years. Because interest rate cuts can spur inflation, many economists now predict the Fed will hold off on reductions until later in 2026 or even 2027.

    “The FOMC met expectations and held rates steady today,” said Atsi Sheth, chief credit officer at Moody’s Ratings, in an email. “As the effects of the Middle East conflict become more pronounced, the case for maintaining policy rates rests on rising inflation risks, while risks to U.S. growth appear contained for now.”

    In its statement, the FOMC reiterated its goal of achieving a 2% annual inflation rate. The Consumer Price Index stood at 3.3% in March.

    Powell noted that the central bank believes the current benchmark rate provides flexibility if economic conditions change, although he added that “nobody is calling for a hike right now.”

    “We feel we’re in a good place to move in either direction,” he said.

    Dissenting members

    Four FOMC members dissented from the Fed’s statement, with Fed Governor Stephen Miran voting in favor of a 0.25 percentage-point cut. Three other members supported maintaining the current rate, but opposed wording in the statement that signaled a bias toward lowering rates.

    “But it is notable that the press release still refers to the Committee ‘considering the extent and timing of additional adjustments’ to rates and hence maintains a bias towards further cuts ahead,” noted Brian Coulton, chief economist at Fitch Ratings, said in an email. “This wording was clearly a topic of much debate given the oil price shock, with three members deciding not to support the inclusion of an easing bias in the statement.”

    Asked about the dissents, Powell said that he viewed it as a natural outcome given the challenges facing the economy.

    “We’re in an unusually difficult situation,” he said. “We’ve had four supply shocks — the pandemic, the invasion of Ukraine, the tariffs and now Iran and the oil spike.”

    He added, “Every supply shock has the capability of driving inflation up and unemployment up. The central bank has a really hard time deciding what the right thing is to do.”

    No rate cuts in 2026?

    The Fed last cut rates in December 2025, when the Consumer Price Index stood at 2.7% on an annual basis — above the Fed’s 2% target but down sharply from the pandemic-era high of 9.1% in June 2022.

    Since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, global energy costs have spiked, pushing the average U.S. price for a gallon of gasoline to $4.23 on Wednesday, about $1.25 more than before the conflict. Economists now forecast that April’s inflation rate could jump to 3.9% annually due to higher oil and gas prices, according to FactSet.

    Higher energy costs are leading some U.S. consumers to hold off on buying big-ticket items, noted Oxford Economics in an April 28 report.

    “We expect higher oil prices will hit consumers’ real disposable income growth and weigh on spending on durable goods and discretionary services the most,” the investment advisory firm said.

    A dip in spending would pose risks for the economy, which relies on consumer purchases for 70 cents of every $1 in gross domestic product.

    So far, the U.S. economy remains resilient, Powell said, but the Fed is closely watching whether consumers pull back on spending due to higher gas and energy prices.

    Uneven job growth

    The Fed is also keeping an eye on the labor market, which has idled amid economic uncertainty, uneven payroll gains and the emergence of artificial intelligence.

    Some companies have announced large layoffs, citing AI, although economists say the technology doesn’t yet appear to be causing widespread job cuts.

    Signs of a weaker job market could persuade some Fed officials to dial back borrowing costs for consumers and businesses. Powell has recently described the employment market as relatively balanced, while acknowledging that young college grads face obstacles in finding work.

    “Any refinement in how the Fed describes labor market conditions, particularly wage pressures and hiring demand, could carry implications for expectations around future rate policy,” noted Ameriprise chief market strategist Anthony Saglimbene in an April 27 research note.

  • 托马斯就种族选区划分裁决直言不讳:“应走得更远”


    卡根在异议中警告,该裁决“让第2条几乎沦为废文”,危及少数族裔投票权保护

    2026年4月29日 美国东部时间下午2:45 / 福克斯新闻频道
    作者:阿什利·奥利弗

    【NEW】你现在可以收听福克斯新闻的文章了!

    收听本文
    时长3分钟

    最高法院大法官克拉伦斯·托马斯周三表示,最高法院应当在其最新的《选举权法案》裁决基础上更进一步,称该法案关键的反歧视条款具有分裂性,绝不应当适用于选区重划案件。

    “正如我30多年前解释过的,我会更进一步,认定《选举权法案》第2条完全不监管选区划分,”与大法官尼尔·戈萨奇持相同立场的托马斯在协同意见书中写道。

    托马斯此番言论是最高法院在“路易斯安那州诉卡莱”一案中以6票对3票作出裁决的一部分,该裁决维持了下级法院的认定:该州的一个非裔占多数的国会选区属于违宪的种族选区划分。

    该裁决影响深远,缩小了《选举权法案》第2条的适用范围。这项民权时代的法律规定,投票政策不得基于种族进行歧视。该裁决已经加大了各州在绘制少数族裔占多数选区时以种族为由进行辩护的难度,但托马斯的协同意见书走得更远,称该法案在任何情况下都不应被用于选区重划案件。

    芝加哥市长布兰登·约翰逊抨击克拉伦斯·托马斯,同时为该市的赔偿特别委员会辩护

    美国最高法院大法官克拉伦斯·托马斯于2025年2月5日在华盛顿白宫椭圆形办公室,为帕姆·邦迪宣誓就任美国司法部长前亮相。(安德鲁·哈尼克/盖蒂图片社)

    “今天的裁决应当大体终结 Voting Rights 判例法中的这场‘灾难性误判’,”托马斯援引自己1994年的协同意见书内容写道。

    托马斯辩称,最高法院此前对《选举权法案》第2条的解释,鼓励了各州进行带有歧视性的基于种族的选区绘制。他表示,第2条的文本涵盖投票权和投票程序,而非各州如何划定选区边界,因此不应被用于有关选区地图的诉讼。

    作为乔治·H·W·布什总统任命的大法官,托马斯长期以来一直主张废除《选举权法案》的该条款。这位美国历史上第二位非裔大法官(仅次于瑟古德·马歇尔大法官)在1994年的“霍尔诉霍尔案”中表示,那些利用该法案第2条声称重划选区稀释了少数族裔选票的人,对法条的解读是错误的。

    “我们在选票稀释案件中所依据的假设,对于任何追求‘宪法色盲’理想的国家来说,都应当是令人反感的,”托马斯当时写道。

    重温斯卡利亚大法官的同性婚姻异议:是先知先觉还是煽动性言论?

    2025年10月15日,美国最高法院外,投票权维权人士举行抗议,当时法院正准备审理对路易斯安那州国会选区地图的质疑案。(比尔·克拉克/CQ-滚石公司/盖蒂图片社)

    由大法官塞缪尔·阿利托撰写的多数派意见并未采纳托马斯的立场。阿利托写道,尽管遵守《选举权法案》有时可能涉及利用种族因素,但该法案并未要求路易斯安那州设立第二个非裔占多数的选区,这意味着该州的地图是违宪的。

    “我们对基于种族的州政府行动的接受度之所以罕见,是有原因的,”阿利托写道,并称路易斯安那州“没有令人信服的利益”将非裔选民集中到一个选区。

    这场持续多年的诉讼源于2020年人口普查后的路易斯安那州选区重划工作。当时下级法院根据《选举权法案》要求该州增设第二个非裔占多数的选区,路易斯安那州随后出台了新的选区地图,但该地图被认定为种族选区划分而遭否决,由此引发了这场上诉至最高法院的新诉讼。

    最高法院大法官埃琳娜·卡根于2016年9月13日在华盛顿乔治华盛顿大学法学院参与一场讨论。(马克·威尔逊/盖蒂图片社)

    点击此处下载福克斯新闻APP

    由奥巴马任命的大法官埃琳娜·卡根撰写的异议书中,三位自由派大法官辩称,多数派的裁决以及托马斯更为严苛的观点,剥夺了针对稀释少数族裔选票的保护措施。

    该裁决“让第2条几乎沦为废文”,卡根写道。

    “根据法院对第2条的新解读,一个州可以系统性地稀释少数族裔公民的投票权,而不会承担任何法律后果,”她写道。

    阿什利·奥利弗是福克斯新闻数字频道和福克斯商业频道的记者,负责报道司法部和法律事务。可将新闻线索发送至ashley.oliver@fox.com。

    Thomas leaves nothing left unsaid on racial gerrymandering decision: ‘Go further’

    Kagan’s dissent warns the decision ‘renders Section 2 all but dead letter’ for minority voting protections

    April 29, 2026 2:45pm EDT / Fox News

    By Ashley Oliver

    NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Listen to this article

    3 min

    Justice Clarence Thomas said Wednesday the Supreme Court should go further than its latest Voting Rights Act ruling, arguing the law’s key anti-discrimination provision was divisive and should never apply to redistricting cases.

    “As I explained more than 30 years ago, I would go further and hold that [section two] of the Voting Rights Act does not regulate districting at all,” Thomas, who was joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, wrote in a concurrence.

    Thomas’ remarks came as part of the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision in Louisiana v. Callais, which upheld a finding that one of the state’s majority-Black congressional districts was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

    The decision had broad implications, serving to narrow section two of the Voting Rights Act, a civil rights-era law making it illegal for voting policies to discriminate based on race. The ruling already makes it more difficult for states to justify using race when drawing majority-minority districts, but Thomas’ concurrence went further, saying the statute should not be used for redistricting under any circumstances.

    CHICAGO MAYOR BRANDON JOHNSON TAKES JAB AT CLARENCE THOMAS WHILE DEFENDING CITY’S REPARATIONS TASK FORCE

    U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas appears before swearing in Pam Bondi as U.S. attorney general in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 5, 2025.(Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

    “Today’s decision should largely put an end to this ‘disastrous misadventure’ in voting-rights jurisprudence,” Thomas wrote, quoting himself from a 1994 concurrence.

    Thomas argued the high court’s prior interpretations of section two of the Voting Rights Act have encouraged states to engage in discriminatory race-based map drawing. He said the text of section two covers access to ballots and voting procedures, not how states draw district lines, and that it should therefore not be used in lawsuits about maps.

    Thomas, an appointee of President George H. W. Bush, has long advocated gutting the Voting Rights Act provision. The conservative justice, the second Black justice in history after Justice Thurgood Marshall, said in the 1994 case, Holder v. Hall, that people who use section two of the law to claim redrawn districts have diluted racial minorities’ votes are reading it incorrectly.

    “The assumptions upon which our vote dilution decisions have been based should be repugnant to any nation that strives for the ideal of a color blind Constitution,” Thomas wrote at the time.

    REVISITING JUSTICE SCALIA’S SAME-SEX MARRIAGE DISSENT: PROPHETIC OR INFLAMMATORY?

    Voting rights activists protest outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on Oct. 15, 2025, as the court prepares to hear arguments challenging Louisiana’s congressional map.(Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images)

    The majority opinion, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, stopped short of Thomas’ position. Alito wrote that while compliance with the Voting Rights Act could sometimes involve the use of race, the law did not require Louisiana to create a second majority-Black district, meaning its map was unconstitutional.

    “‘Our acceptance of race-based state action has been rare for a reason,’” Alito wrote, saying Louisiana had “no compelling interest” in packing Black voters into the district.

    The yearslong case arose from Louisiana’s redistricting efforts after the 2020 census, during which the state added a second majority-Black district after a lower court said the Voting Rights Act required it. That new map was then struck down as a racial gerrymander, setting up the new lawsuit that rose to the Supreme Court.

    Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan participates in a discussion at George Washington University Law School in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 13, 2016.(Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    The three liberal justices argued in a dissent, authored by Justice Elena Kagan, an Obama appointee, that the majority’s decision, and Thomas’ more stringent view, stripped protections against diluting racial minorities’ votes.

    The decision “renders Section 2 all but dead letter,” Kagan wrote.

    “Under the Court’s new view of Section 2, a State can, without legal consequence, systematically dilute minority citizens’ voting power,” she wrote.

    Ashley Oliver is a reporter for Fox News Digital and FOX Business, covering the Justice Department and legal affairs. Email story tips to ashley.oliver@fox.com.

  • 五角大楼发言人赫格斯为对伊战争辩护,称其并非泥潭


    2026-04-29 16:31:28 / 路透社

    华盛顿4月29日电(路透社)——美国国防部长皮特·赫格斯周三在国会发表激烈讲话,为对伊战争辩护,称其并非泥潭,并抨击民主党议员批评这场不受欢迎的冲突是“软弱无能”。

    这是美国和以色列于2月28日发动对伊战争以来,赫格斯首次前往国会作证,此次战争已导致汽油价格大幅上涨。

    《路透伊朗简报》新闻通讯将为您带来伊朗战争的最新进展与分析,点击此处订阅。

    路透益普索民调显示,冲突爆发以来特朗普的支持率大幅下滑,仅34%的美国人认可美国对伊朗采取的军事行动,这一数字较4月中旬的36%和3月中旬的38%有所下降。

    2026年4月24日,在美国华盛顿五角大楼,美伊停火期间,美国国防部长皮特·赫格斯在伊朗战争情况通报会后离场。路透社/凯文·拉马克

    民主党议员就这场无明确期限的冲突向赫格斯连发多个问题,来自加利福尼亚州的众议员约翰·加拉门迪称这场战争是“泥潭”,且“在各个层面都是政治和经济灾难”。

    赫格斯愤怒回应。

    “你称其为泥潭,这是在向我们的敌人输送宣传材料?你发表这番言论真是可耻,”赫格斯在回应加拉门迪时说道,并抨击国会民主党议员“鲁莽、软弱且失败主义”。

    “不要说:‘一方面我支持军队,另一方面却称一场为期两个月的任务是泥潭。’……你在这里为谁喝彩?你支持谁?”

    菲尔·斯图尔特、伊德里斯·阿里和伊斯梅尔·沙基尔 华盛顿报道;米歇尔·尼科尔斯 编辑

    我们的报道准则:汤姆森路透社信任原则。

    Pentagon’s Hegseth defends Iran war, says it is not a quagmire

    2026-04-29 16:31:28 / Reuters

    WASHINGTON, April 29 (Reuters) – U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth sought to defend the Iran ​war in fiery remarks to Congress on ‌Wednesday, saying it was not a quagmire and attacking Democratic lawmakers as “feckless” for criticizing the unpopular conflict.

    Hegseth was ​testifying before Congress for the first time ​since the U.S. and Israel launched a ⁠war against Iran on February 28 that ​has led to a surge in gasoline prices.

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

    ​Trump’s popularity has taken a pounding since the conflict began and just 34% of Americans approve of the U.S. ​conflict with Iran, down from 36% in ​mid-April and 38% in mid-March, the Reuters/Ipsos poll found.

    U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth leaves after a briefing on the Iran war, amid a ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran, at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 24, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

    Democrats ‌peppered ⁠Hegseth with questions about the open-ended conflict, with Rep. John Garamendi of California calling it a “quagmire” and “political and economic disaster at every level.”

    Hegseth ​responded angrily.

    “You ​call it ⁠a quagmire, handing propaganda to our enemies? Shame on you for that ​statement,” Hegseth said in response to Garamendi, ​and slammed “reckless, ⁠feckless, and defeatist” Congressional Democrats.

    “Don’t say: ‘I support the troops on one hand, and then a two-month ⁠mission ​is a quagmire.’ … Who are you ​cheering for here? Who you pulling for?”

    Reporting by Phil Stewart, Idrees ​Ali and Ismail Shakil; editing by Michelle Nichols

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.