博客

Shigeaki Mori, Hiroshima atomic bomb survivor who was embraced by Obama, dies at 88

Updated on: March 17, 2026 / 12:46 PM EDT / CBS/AP

Shigeaki Mori, a Japanese atomic bomb survivor in Hiroshima and a historian but best known for a big hug he was given by then U.S. President Barack Obama during his historic visit to the city a decade ago, has died. He was 88.

Born in 1937, Mori was 8 years old when he survived the Aug. 6, 1945 U.S. attack. He was just one and a half miles away from the blast. About 30 years later, he learned a little known fact — that American prisoners of war held in Japan were among those killed by the atomic bomb dropped by their own country.

Working as a full-time company employee, Mori researched U.S. and Japanese official documents and tracked down 12 American POWs. He wrote letters to their bereaved families in the U.S. who didn’t know how their loved ones had died.

The U.S. atomic attack on Hiroshima instantly destroyed the city and killed tens of thousands. The death toll by the end of that year was 140,000. A second bomb dropped on Nagasaki killed another 70,000.

President Barack Obama hugs Shigeaki Mori at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial park cenotaph in Hiroshima on May 27, 2016. JOHANNES EISELE/AFP via Getty Images

Mori authored a book, “The Secret of the American POWs Killed by the Atomic Bomb,” published in Japanese in 2008. The book won him a prestigious Kikuchi Kan Prize, and was later translated into English.

Editors of the English translation of his book said on their website that Mori died on Sunday. Japanese media reported that he died at a Hiroshima hospital.

His research eventually led to U.S. confirmation of the deaths of the 12 captured American service members in the bombing.

“The research I spent more than 40 years was not about people from the enemy country. It was about human beings,” Mori later said.

Obama, who became the first U.S. leader to visit Hiroshima’s Peace Memorial Park in 2016, mentioned in his speech “a dozen Americans held prisoner” as being among the victims. He recognized Mori for seeking out the Americans’ families, believing their loss was equal to his own, and later gave him a hug.

Mori appeared overwhelmed with emotion as he shook hands with him.

President Barack Obama shakes hands with Shigeaki Mori at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park in Hiroshima, Japan, on May 27, 2016. Akio Kon / Bloomberg via Getty Images

“The president gestured as if he was going to give me a hug, so we hugged,” Mori told reporters afterwards.

“I heard screams”

Mori was thrown into a river by the force of the huge blast on August 6, 1945.

“I crawled up out of the water and saw a woman tottering toward me,” Mori told AFP before meeting Obama at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park in 2016.

“Blood was everywhere on her body, and internal organs hung from her abdomen,” he recalled.

“While holding them, she asked me where she could find a hospital. Crying, I ran away, leaving her alone,” he said.

“People who were still alive were collapsed all around me. I escaped by stamping on their faces and heads. I heard screams from a broken down house. But I ran away as I was still a child with no power to help.”

Agence France-Presse contributed to this report.

US Border Patrol official Gregory Bovino to retire at end of March

By Ted Hesson
March 17, 2026 4:15 PM UTC Updated 3 hours ago

Item 1 of 2 U.S. Border Patrol Chief Gregory Bovino outside a Speedway gas station after his convoy stopped there, where protesters and community observers gathered, in Minneapolis, Minnesota, U.S., January 21, 2026. REUTERS/Madison Swart/File Photo

[1/2]U.S. Border Patrol Chief Gregory Bovino outside a Speedway gas station after his convoy stopped there, where protesters and community observers gathered, in Minneapolis, Minnesota, U.S., January 21, 2026. REUTERS/Madison Swart/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

• Summary
• Companies

• Bovino led aggressive immigration sweeps in major U.S. cities
• Trump’s immigration approach faced backlash and legal challenges
• Bovino removed after controversial incidents, retirement plans confirmed

WASHINGTON, March 17 (Reuters) – U.S. Border ​Patrol official Gregory Bovino plans to retire at the end of March, he ‌confirmed to Reuters on Tuesday, marking the formal departure of a prominent leader of President Donald Trump’s aggressive immigration crackdown.

Bovino, 55, led confrontational immigration sweeps in Los Angeles, Chicago and other major U.S. cities. Under his leadership, ​masked border agents clashed with residents as they scoured neighborhoods for possible immigration ​offenders.

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

“The greatest honor of my entire life was to work alongside Border ⁠Patrol agents on the border and in the interior of the United States in ​some of the most challenging conditions the agency has ever faced,

节点运行失败

Trump bids goodbye to intel official who resigned over Iran: ‘Good thing that he’s out’

‘He said that Iran was not a threat,’ Trump notes. ‘Iran was a threat’

By Eric Mack
Fox News

Published March 17, 2026 12:22pm EDT | Updated March 17, 2026 1:21pm EDT

After the abrupt resignation of counterterror official Joe Kent, President Donald Trump said ‘it’s a good thing that he’s out,

A Biden-appointed federal judge who drew Supreme Court intervention twice in a separate deportation case is facing fresh conservative backlash after temporarily blocking Trump administration vaccine policies on Monday.

Judge Brian Murphy’s ruling in the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts was the latest in a string of high-profile decisions that blocked administration policies and were later reversed on appeal, prompting sharp criticism from the Department of Justice and intensifying scrutiny of his record.

“How many times can Judge Murphy get reversed in one year?” Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche wrote on X. “The same day he is stayed for repeatedly refusing to follow the law, he issues another activist decision. We will keep appealing these lawless decisions, and we will keep winning.

“The question is, how much embarrassment can this Judge take?”

Earlier Monday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit paused a decision by Murphy to block the Department of Homeland Security’s third-country deportation policy. Murphy’s decision had prevented DHS from deporting what court papers said could be thousands of illegal immigrants and followed the judge issuing similar, related decisions last year that were both rejected by the Supreme Court.

In the vaccine case, brought by medical organizations against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Murphy issued a sweeping preliminary injunction, finding Kennedy likely broke the law by overhauling the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s vaccine policies.

In both instances, Murphy’s decisions interfered with top Trump administration agenda items — cracking down on immigration and restructuring vaccine mandates — that raised eyebrows on the right.

Murphy’s decision in the vaccine case granted preliminary relief to the medical organizations by staying a January 2026 immunization schedule that reduced the number of vaccine requirements for children and invalidated a newly appointed vaccine advisory committee and the committee’s decisions while the lawsuit proceeds through the courts.

Quoting Carl Sagan, Murphy said in his order that science is “the best we have” and touted the efficacy of vaccines as he blocked the CDC’s new vaccine schedule.

University of Minnesota law school professor Ilan Wurman questioned what he viewed as the judge’s “double standard.”

“When I litigated COVID cases against the government, the courts regularly said they had to defer to the public health experts,” Wurman said. “I assume there’s a good reason for the double standard here? Or are there some health experts federal judges in Massachusetts like more than others?”

Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind., said Democrat-appointed judges sided with the Biden administration and progressive groups on transgender policies that took an expansive view of sex and gender, which Banks said flew in the face of science and did not jibe with Murphy’s ruling.

“Progressive district court judges claim RFK’s vaccine policies aren’t based on science yet had no problem with Biden’s radical gender policies. Seems like they’re the ones not following the science,” Banks said.

Murphy first gained headlines when the Supreme Court stayed Murphy’s injunction over the third-party deportation policy in a 6-3 order last June. The high court followed up with a rare, second 7-2 order a week later admonishing the judge for flouting its decision.

George Washington University Law professor Jonathan Turley observed at the time that Murphy had given “a stiff arm” to the Supreme Court.

“Regardless of your views on the merits, this system cannot function with such rogue operators at the trial level,” Turley said.

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.

Using AI for financial advice? Here’s what to watch out for.

March 17, 2026 / 12:58 PM EDT / CBS News

More Americans are turning to artificial intelligence to manage their finances. But the tech shouldn’t be the only tool you rely on to deal with money matters, according to CBS News business analyst Jill Schlesinger.

“I think AI can be great for general education. How do I read my pay stub? What’s the difference between a Roth and a traditional IRA?” she told CBS Mornings co-host Nate Burleson. “But when you’re making a big decision, it’s kind of scary to rely on AI, which can hallucinate.”

Schlesinger said Americans should also be careful when it comes to relying on financial influencers, or finfluencers, who offer advice and financial education on social media platforms.

“These folks are usually trying to sell you something,” she said. “They’re often not credentialed.”

Two-thirds of Americans use AI for financial advice

Exercising a degree of caution when using AI for financial advice is important, especially as more people lean on the technology to manage everything from their savings to their investments, experts say.

A September report from Credit Karma found that 66% of Americans have used generative AI for financial advice. Younger generations are even more likely to rely on the tech, with 82% of Gen Z and 82% of millennials reporting they’ve used AI for financial guidance.

Credit Karma said that the most common uses for AI are basic financial education and financial goal setting. Americans are also asking AI how to save for retirement and invest in the stock market.

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

Using AI responsibly

When it comes to using AI responsibly, Schlesinger advises Americans not to overshare, given potential privacy risks.

AI chatbots can sometimes keep information you share in a chat in their systems indefinitely and use it to train their models, according to a 2025 study from Stanford University.

“Read those privacy policies,” Schlesinger said.

The CBS News analyst also encouraged people to turn to other sources outside of AI if they want to start making investments or get on track for retirement. Money management apps like Monarch and Honeydue can help, as well as more old-school methods.

“I always like to remind folks, if you just want to actually invest, use your company-based retirement plan,” she said. “That is, by far, the best way in.”

Schlesinger said large investment firms can offer guidance when it comes to buying index funds or exchange-traded funds. Calling up a trusted relative can also be a good course of action, she said.

“You need a third party who’s unbiased to help you out,” she said. “Please don’t rely solely on technology. Use it for education.”

Edited by Aimee Picchi

Amazon introduces 1-hour and 3-hour delivery in U.S.

March 17, 2026 / 2:32 PM EDT / CBS News

By

Megan Cerullo

Megan Cerullo

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

Same-day delivery not fast enough for you? Amazon is revving up its delivery service by offering one- and three-hour options in cities across the U.S., the e-commerce giant said Tuesday.

The move better positions Amazon to compete with big-box stores, local drugstores and other retailers that have responded to the growth in online shopping by leaning into faster delivery in recent years, GlobalData retail analyst Neil Saunders told CBS News.

“It’s bad news for drugstores in particular,” he said, noting that Amazon’s prices are often superior for everyday staples like toothpaste or toilet paper.

Where is 1-hour and 3-hour delivery available?

Amazon’s 1-hour delivery is now available in parts of Chicago; Houston; Los Angeles; Nashville, Tennessee; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; and Washington, D.C., as well as in smaller cities including Des Moines, Iowa; Boise, Idaho; and American Fork, Utah.

Three-hour delivery is available in more than 2,000 large, midsize and small cities, and in suburbs like Cornwall, Pennsylvania; Harrah, Oklahoma; and Arabi, Louisiana, according to Amazon. The company plans to start offering accelerated delivery in other cities in the coming months (See if the new delivery options are available where you live.)

What can I get delivered in under 3 hours?

A range of different products is eligible for expedited delivery, according to Amazon. They include household supplies like paper towels and toilet paper; health and beauty items; over-the-counter medications; electronics; toys; and clothing.

How much does it cost?

For members of Amazon’s Prime shopping club, 1-hour delivery costs $9.99, while the 3-hour option runs $4.99. For non-Prime customers, 1-hour delivery costs $19.99 and 3-hour delivery is $14.99. Prime members may still have goods delivered same-day for free with their annual memberships.

Edited by Alain Sherter

Elon Musk, US SEC in talks to settle lawsuit over Twitter disclosures

By Reuters
March 17, 2026 6:41 PM UTC Updated 31 mins ago

Tesla CEO Elon Musk looks on at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 11, 2025. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo [Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab]

March 17 (Reuters) – Elon Musk and the ​U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission are in ‌talks to settle the regulator’s lawsuit accusing the world’s richest person of waiting too long to ​disclose his purchases of Twitter shares ​in 2022.

In a court filing, the SEC ⁠and Musk said they are “engaged in discussions ​of a potential resolution that would mean ​further proceedings might not be necessary.”

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

Both sides asked the presiding judge to extend until April 1 from March ​18 a deadline to propose a ​schedule for further proceedings.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Neither the SEC nor lawyers for ‌Musk ⁠could immediately be reached for comment.

The SEC sued Musk in January 2025, saying his 11-day delay in revealing his initial 5% Twitter ​stake in ​late March ⁠and early April 2022 let him buy more than $500 million of ​shares at artificially low prices.

It has ​argued ⁠that Musk should pay a civil fine and repay the $150 million he allegedly saved at ⁠the ​expense of unsuspecting investors. Musk ​has called the delay inadvertent.

Reporting by Jonathan Stempel and Chris ​Prentice in New York; Editing by Alison Williams

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

A typical U.S. family needs annual income of $145,000 to thrive, study finds. About half fall short.

March 17, 2026 / 3:31 PM EDT / CBS News

Roughly half of Americans fall short of the annual income needed to cover their basic needs, according to new research.

A U.S. family with children needs about $145,000 in income to be considered economically secure, according to a March 16 report from the Urban Institute. About 49% of Americans live below that financial threshold, the nonpartisan think tank found.

In 2024 (the latest available data), the median household income for married couples in the U.S. was $128,700, U.S. Census data shows.

Ingredients for economic security

According to Urban’s analysis, economic security today includes having enough money to pay for:

• Adequate food
• Clothing
• Housing
• Health care
• Child care
• Transportation

• Postsecondary education
• Student loan repayments
• Savings for emergencies and retirement
• Additional costs, such as for personal care products

The research comes as many Americans continue to feel the pinch of rising prices, with even some six-figure households saying they are struggling to pay for basics like utilities and health care.

Riding the “hamster wheel”

While Urban’s measure differs from the poverty rate, which measures extreme hardship, it signals that even people with good-paying jobs may still not be earning enough to feel as if they are thriving.

“That is consistent with the experiences that we’re hearing from people — that they might not be destitute, but some of them are skipping bills — and some of them are making their bills on a regular basis, but they’re not getting ahead,” economist Gregory Acs, vice president of Urban’s tax and income supports division and a co-author of the report, told CBS News.

He added, “They feel like they’re on the hamster wheel economy.”

Earning above the $145,000 annual income threshold allows people to get ahead and feel financially secure, the analysis said.

“If you have more people feeling that their efforts are rewarded, that they have a stronger sense of autonomy, they are able to devote more time to their own communities, to their own families,” Acs said. “Parents can invest more in their kids — time, energy, money.”

The real poverty line?

The analysis echoes a viral Substack post from 2025 by Wall Street strategist Michael Green that posited that the actual poverty line in the U.S. — or how much you have to earn to afford necessities like food and shelter — is in reality much higher than the government’s official number, which stands at $33,000 for a family of four.

By Green’s calculation, Americans who earn less than $140,000 should be considered poor because their income isn’t sufficient to pay for basics like housing, childcare and food — similar to the measures the Urban Institute used in its analysis.

“He called it a poverty rate — I think it actually was more of an economic security rate,” Acs said, referring to Green’s post. “His intuition, in his back-of-the-envelope calculation, is broadly consistent with the way we added things up.”

The same share of Americans likely remains below the economic security threshold in 2026, Acs noted, given that wages and inflation have been rising relatively in tandem in the last several years. Still, some households may be facing more acute financial stress this year, such as those who lost enhanced premium health credits for the Affordable Care Act plans when they expired in January.

Who struggles most

The share of people who live below Urban’s economic security threshold varies by race, age and family composition, the analysis found. Single-parent households have among the lowest rates of economic security, with about 90% below the research firm’s proposed threshold.

About 8 in 10 U.S. renters fall below the economic security line, roughly double the rate of homeowners, the research found, which also noted that about 45% of families with one member over the age of 65 lack economic security.

Under-65 households without children need about $95,900 in annual earnings to meet basic needs, less than families with kids, largely because they don’t face child care costs, according to Urban.

Families with at least one adult over 65 require $108,500 for economic security. While they don’t require childcare, older households tend to have higher healthcare costs, the analysis found.

Edited by Alain Sherter

US Supreme Court’s Roberts says personal hostility aimed at judges has ‘got to stop’

March 17, 2026 7:47 PM UTC / Reuters

By John Kruzel

节点运行失败

U.S. President Donald Trump, next to Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, arrives to deliver the State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress in the House Chamber at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., U.S., February 24, 2026. REUTERS/KEVIN LAMARQUE/File Photo

• Summary

• Trump has decried “corrupt judges” who ruled against him
• He denounced Supreme Court justices after tariffs ruling
• Roberts calls personal attacks on judges “quite dangerous”

WASHINGTON, March 17 (Reuters) – U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts said on Tuesday that hostility directed in personal terms at judges ​is “dangerous and it’s got to stop,” commenting just days after President Donald Trump’s latest social media broadside against judges ‌who have ruled against him and his administration.

Roberts did not mention the Republican president by name in his remarks at an event at Rice University in Houston. But Roberts, who has led the U.S. Supreme Court for more than two decades, said that while criticism of judicial decisions is welcome ​and often healthy, attacks of a personal nature against judges cross a line.

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

“The problem sometimes is that the criticism ​can move from a focus on legal analysis to personalities, and you see … that it’s more ⁠directed in a personal way,” Roberts said. “And that, frankly, can be quite dangerous.”

“Judges around the country work very hard to ​get it right. And if they don’t, their opinions are subject to criticism,” Roberts added. “But personally directed hostility is dangerous and ​it’s got to stop.”

Trump and senior members of his administration have heaped scorn on judges who have issued a series of rulings impeding his agenda since his return to the presidency last year.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

The president in a social media post on Sunday resumed his criticism of Washington-based U.S. District Judge James ​Boasberg, who last week blocked subpoenas issued in a criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell pursued by Trump-appointed prosecutor ​Jeanine Pirro.

He called for Boasberg’s removal from any Trump-related cases, adding that the judge should “suffer serious disciplinary action” along with “numerous other corrupt judges.”

Trump last ‌year ⁠called for Boasberg’s impeachment by Congress and referred to him as “radical left,” prompting Roberts to rebuke the president and describe impeachment as “not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.”

Roberts and the other conservative justices who hold a 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court have sided with Trump in a series of emergency rulings in the past year. The court, however, last month struck ​down his sweeping global tariffs ​as unlawful in a ruling ⁠authored by Roberts. Trump in his social media post on Sunday renewed his attacks on the six justices who ruled against his imposition of the tariffs under a law meant for national ​emergencies.

Immediately after that ruling, Trump lashed out at those six justices – including two who he appointed ​during his first ⁠term as president, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett – while hailing the three justices who backed him. “I think it’s an embarrassment to their families, you wanna know the truth, the two of them,” Trump said, referring to Gorsuch and Barrett.

Trump in those remarks also ⁠claimed that ​the court “has been swayed by foreign interests,” but did not provide any ​evidence.

Roberts in his 2024 end-of-year report singled out violence, intimidation, disinformation and threats to defy lawfully entered judgments as areas of “illegitimate activity” that “threaten the independence of judges ​on which the rule of law depends.”

Reporting by John Kruzel; Additional reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Will Dunham

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Arizona files criminal charges against Kalshi, alleging it is engaged in illegal gambling

March 17, 2026 / 3:42 PM EDT / CBS News

Arizona’s attorney general on Tuesday filed criminal charges against Kalshi, alleging the prediction market platform is engaging in illegal gambling practices and election wagering.

The complaint, filed in Maricopa County, Arizona, includes 20 separate counts against Kalshi, claiming the company accepted bets from Arizona residents in violation of state law. The bets in question focused on events including sporting contests, individual player performance, legislation and state and federal elections, according to a statement issued by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes’ office.

“Kalshi may brand itself as a ‘prediction market,’ but what it’s actually doing is running an illegal gambling operation and taking bets on Arizona elections, both of which violate Arizona law,” Mayes said in the statement.

Four of the counts against Kalshi are on election wagering, while the remaining 16 are related to betting and wagering.

Kalshi called the criminal charges “paper thin” and said states don’t have the authority to regulate a national financial exchange.

“As other courts have recognized and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission affirms, Kalshi is subject to federal jurisdiction,” a spokesperson told CBS News in an email. “It’s different from what sportsbooks and casinos offer their customers, and it should not be overseen by a patchwork of inconsistent state laws.”

— This is a developing story and will be updated