博客

Democratic Rep. Mike Quigley: Trump is talking about escalation in Iran ‘flippantly’ | CNN Politics

Published 1:35 PM EDT, Mon March 9, 2026 / CNN

Illinois Democratic Rep. Mike Quigley joined CNN’s The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer and Pamela Brown to discuss how the White House has not yet ruled out the possibility of American boots on the ground in Iran.

5:52 • Source: CNN

Politics of the Day 11 videos

Video Ad Feedback

Democratic Rep. Mike Quigley: Trump is talking about escalation in Iran “flippantly”

Video Ad Feedback

Democratic Rep. Mike Quigley: Trump is talking about escalation in Iran “flippantly”

5:52

Now playing

• Source: CNN

Video Ad Feedback

Hours-long TSA lines amid partial government shutdown

0:30

Now playing

• Source: CNN

Video Ad Feedback

‘Get used to it’: Jake Tapper responds to Trump admin’s criticism of Iran war coverage

3:26

Now playing

• Source: CNN

Video Ad Feedback

‘Beautiful’: Scholar reacts to former President Obama seemingly criticizing current administration

2:04

Now playing

• Source: CNN

Video Ad Feedback

Trump touts ongoing Middle East conflict a success as the DHS Secretary is ousted

4:50

Now playing

• Source: CNN

Video Ad Feedback

‘Have I Got News For You ’ comedians roll the tape on Markwayne Mullin

1:56

Now playing

• Source: CNN

CNN Investigates: US-Israeli strikes hit dangerously close to hospitals

3:28

Now playing

• Source: CNN

Video Ad Feedback

Dana Bash interviews President Trump about the war with Iran

5:29

Now playing

• Source: CNN

Video Ad Feedback

Trump ousts Noem as frustrations build among White House officials and GOP lawmakers

2:11

Now playing

• Source: CNN

Video Ad Feedback

Democrat who sparred with Noem reacts to her firing

0:37

Now playing

• Source: CNN

Video Ad Feedback

Mike Pence: History will record Trump “made the right call”

1:09

Now playing

• Source: CNN

See more videos

Ad Feedback

Anthropic sues Pentagon, Trump administration over “supply chain risk” designation

By Stefan Becket
Updated on: March 9, 2026 / 1:17 PM EDT / CBS News

Washington— Anthropic sued the Defense Department and other federal agencies on Monday over the Trump administration’s move to designate it a supply chain risk and eliminate its use across the government, the latest chapter in a bitter dispute over the firm’s powerful artificial intelligence model.

In a 48-page lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Anthropic said efforts by the Pentagon and President Trump to punish the company were “unprecedented and unlawful.”

“The Constitution does not allow the government to wield its enormous power to punish a company for its protected speech. No federal statute authorizes the actions taken here. Anthropic turns to the judiciary as a last resort to vindicate its rights and halt the Executive’s unlawful campaign of retaliation,” the filing said.

The company filed a separate, narrower suit asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to review the Pentagon’s determination that it poses a risk to the supply chain. Federal law gives that court jurisdiction to review the finding.

The dispute stems from guardrails that Anthropic sought to impose on the military’s use of Claude, the only AI model authorized for use on classified networks. The company sought assurances from the Pentagon that Claude would not be used for mass surveillance of U.S. citizens or to power lethal autonomous weapons. The Pentagon insisted that Claude be available for “all lawful use.”

The two sides failed to resolve the conflict before a deadline of Feb. 27. Mr. Trump announced that he was ordering all federal agencies “to IMMEDIATELY CEASE all use of Anthropic’s technology.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Anthropic would be designated a supply chain risk and cut off from defense contracts, phasing out the technology over the course of six months. The Pentagon has continued to use Claude during the U.S. and Israeli war with Iran, CBS News reported last week.

Hegseth formally issued the supply chain risk designation last week. Anthropic’s lawsuit asks the court to block Hegseth’s order and declare it as “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and contrary to law.” The company also asked the court to find that the president did not have the authority to order the rest of the government to cut ties with Anthropic.

“Anthropic’s contracts with the federal government are already being canceled. Current and future contracts with private parties are also in doubt, jeopardizing hundreds of millions of dollars in the near-term,” the company’s lawsuit said. “On top of those immediate economic harms, Anthropic’s reputation and core First Amendment freedoms are under attack. Absent judicial relief, those harms will only compound in the weeks and months ahead.”

The lawsuit accused the administration of “seeking to destroy the economic value created by one of the world’s fastest-growing private companies, which is a leader in responsibly developing an emergent technology of vital significance to our Nation.”

“The Challenged Actions inflict immediate and irreparable harm on Anthropic; on others whose speech will be chilled; on those benefiting from the economic value the company can continue to create; and on a global public that deserves robust dialogue and debate on what AI means for warfare and surveillance,” the suit continued. “There is no valid justification for the Challenged Actions. The Court should declare them unlawful and enjoin Defendants from taking any steps to implement them.”

A Pentagon spokesperson declined to comment on pending litigation.

In a statement, White House spokeswoman Liz Huston said the president “will never allow a radical left, woke company to jeopardize our national security by dictating how the greatest and most powerful military in the world operates.”

“Under the Trump Administration, our military will obey the United States Constitution — not any woke AI company’s terms of service,” she said.

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Pentagon
Page of 48

Eleanor Watson and Jacob Rosen contributed to this report.

White House fires GOP NTSB member, who calls it ‘political hit job’

March 9, 2026 at 1:35 p.m. EDT Today at 1:35 p.m. EDT / The Washington Post

J. Todd Inman frequently represented the National Transportation Safety Board in news conferences after the deadly American Airlines crash in D.C. last year.

J. Todd Inman, member of the National Transportation Safety Board, speaks to reporters Feb. 1, 2025, at Reagan National Airport. (Pete Kiehart/For The Washington Post)

By Natalie Allison

The White House fired a Republican member of the National Transportation Safety Board following reports of him drinking on the job, among other alleged misconduct. J. Todd Inman, who frequently represented the organization during news conferences after the deadly American Airlines crash in D.C. last year, called the firing a “political hit job” in a statement to The Washington Post.

Rep. Kevin Kiley leaves GOP to become an independent, complicating Johnson’s majority

Updated on: March 9, 2026 / 2:35 PM EDT / CBS News

Washington — Rep. Kevin Kiley of California said Monday he was immediately leaving the Republican Party to become an independent.

“I’m also today asking the clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives to have that reflected in the official roster,” Kiley said in a call with reporters.

The move complicates House Speaker Mike Johnson’s narrow majority, though Kiley said he plans to caucus with the Republican Party “for the remainder of this term.”

“That is how I was elected to begin this term,” he said.

But Kiley would not say whether he would be a reliable vote for Johnson during procedural votes. Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, can afford to lose one vote, if all members are present and voting.

Rep. Kevin Kiley questions Attorney General Pam Bondi during the House Judiciary Committee hearing on Feb. 11, 2026. Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Kiley’s switch means Republicans now hold 217 seats compared with Democrats’ 214, with three vacancies. Kiley is the only independent in the lower chamber.

Kiley said he had a brief discussion with Johnson over the weekend about his plans.

Asked whether his move could be framed as a falling out with the Republican Party, Kiley said he would “characterize it as my frustration with partisanship itself.”

Kiley announced Friday he would run in California’s newly drawn 6th Congressional District as an independent, saying “political division has become a serious problem for our country.”

“It is no secret I’ve been frustrated, at times disgusted, by the hyper-partisanship in Congress. In the last year it’s led to the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, a massive increase in healthcare costs, and of course, a pointless redistricting war. The epidemic of gerrymandering has spread from Texas to California to states all across the country. Both parties are complicit,” he said Friday.

The two-term congressman was critical of Johnson’s handling of the 43-day government shutdown that stretched from October to November. He also broke with his party to help force a vote on the now-expired Affordable Care Act enhanced premium tax credits at the end of last year. More recently, he helped sink a key procedural vote that would have barred lawmakers from overturning President Trump’s sweeping global tariffs.

7 big political questions about the war with Iran

Analysis by Aaron Blake | 47 min ago | PUBLISHED Mar 9, 2026, 2:37 PM ET

President Donald Trump, with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth at his side, speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One on a flight to Miami on Saturday.

Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

The war with Iran is now beginning its second full week, with no signs of de-escalation or conclusion on the horizon.

But as the fighting has raged in the Middle East, the political lines have been drawn in the US.

Here are some of the biggest political questions about the war and what happens next.

Will it actually be short?

---

President Donald Trump’s previous foreign strikes haven’t seemed to measurably hurt him, in large part because of how short-lived they were. Striking Iran’s nuclear facilities last year and ousting Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January weren’t popular, but they were one-day operations.

The war with Iran is different, and it’s not clear how long it will last.

Trump and his team have thrown out vastly different timetables, ranging from a few days to four weeks to six weeks to indefinite.

And crucially, the administration has set ambitious goals.

One of them is preventing Iran from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon. But that could seemingly involve a lengthier war and possibly measures such as deploying US special forces to seize nuclear materials.

Trump on Friday suggested the conclusion to the war would not be negotiated; rather, it would end only with Iran’s “unconditional surrender.” (Iran has likewise said it has no interest in diplomacy.)

All of which sounds a lot like this could drag on for a while — at least, to the extent Trump sticks to his demands.

And that could certainly test Americans’ apparently limited patience.

Could public support rise?

---

This war, like the previous Iran strikes and the Venezuela operation, is not popular. Across surveys from CNN, Reuters-Ipsos, Fox News, The Washington Post and NBC News, it’s an average of 12 points underwater.

It would seem difficult to make it popular any time soon.

A few things that could increase support seem to include if Iran ultimately does surrender and agrees to nuclear restrictions, and if its leadership gives up control of the country.

But the former is more of a long-term goal. And the latter suffered a setback this weekend when we learned that the late Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s son, Mojtaba Khamenei, will succeed him.

Will support fall?

---

It seems more likely that the war could become less popular, at least in the near term.

One reason is gas prices. Trump has hailed a modest decline since he’s been back in office as proof of his ability to lower prices. But we’re now experiencing the biggest oil disruption in history and surging prices across the country.

Trump says the higher gas prices are temporary and a “very small price to pay” for peace and security. But it’s not clear that Americans see Iran as enough of a threat to justify the price. And given how much of a problem inflation may be for Republicans in the 2026 midterm elections, some on the right might worry about a prolonged war.

The Reuters-Ipsos poll showed 45% of Americans and even 34% of Republicans said higher gas and oil prices would make them more likely to oppose the war.

Trump has reversed course before when his moves had big financial costs — including on tariffs after the financial markets reacted negatively.

Another big X factor is whether we see more troop deaths and even boots on the ground.

The seven US soldiers killed during the Iran conflict are seen in these images released by the US Army. From top left to right, Capt. Cody Khork, Sgt. 1st Class Nicole Amor, Sgt. 1st Class Noah Teitjens and Sgt. Declean Coady. From bottom left to right, Maj. Jeffrey O’Brien, Chief Warrant Officer 3 Robert Marzan and Sgt. Benjamin N. Pennington.

US Army

We learned Sunday that a seventh soldier has died in the war, and the administration has made clear it’s quite sensitive to the amount of coverage the first six received. Boots on the ground would risk many more deaths and casualties, but the administration hasn’t ruled out that option.

The Reuters-Ipsos poll showed 54% of Americans and 42% of Republicans said more deaths could turn them more against the war.

And the final big one to watch right now is what we learn about the strike that killed scores of children at an Iranian elementary school.

While we haven’t gotten definitive word about who was responsible — the Pentagon has said it’s investigating — the evidence increasingly points toward the United States.

Rescue workers and residents search through the rubble after a strike on a girls’ elementary school in Minab, Iran, on February 28.

Abbas Zakeri/Mehr News Agency/AP

It’s the kind of episode that could damage people’s faith in the administration to prosecute this war.

Fox News host Laura Ingraham has warned the administration about this, saying Monday that it “must wrap its investigation and address [it] head-on.”

“Horrible unintended tragedy of this war,” she added.

Do Republicans stay on board with Trump?

---

It’s a tired storyline at this point. When Trump has launched military strikes that fly in the face of his past claims to be a noninterventionist, we’ve asked whether MAGA will stand behind him.

Repeatedly now, MAGA voters have been skeptical before those previous strikes but then jumped on board.

But that initial skepticism still matters — as does the apparent softness of the support from Trump’s base for the current conflict.

CNN’s poll, for instance, showed 77% of Republicans said they supported Trump’s most recent strikes, but just 37% supported them “strongly.”

There’s also an uptick in opposition from right-wing influencers — people like Megyn Kelly — relative to previous strikes. It seems possible they could marshal opposition in ways we haven’t previously seen.

That doesn’t mean a majority of MAGA is going to turn on Trump over this. But if support among his base does drop, that would make it difficult to press forward with a prolonged war.

Can the administration settle on a justification — and one that holds up?

---

Perhaps the most bizarre aspect of this war so far is how the administration can’t seem to settle on a justification for it.

About a week and a half in, officials still appear to be road-testing different rationales and seeing what might stick.

Here’s the progression:

• First it was that Iran was close to nuclear bomb material.
• Then it was that Iran was close to being able to strike the US homeland with an intercontinental ballistic missile, or ICBM.
• Then, once the war started, it was because Israel was going to strike Iran, and Iran would have retaliated by striking US targets. Ipso facto, Iran was an imminent threat to the US.
• Then it was that Iran was going to strike the US regardless of what Israel did.
• And now, this weekend, Trump wagered to ABC News that Iran’s “plan was to attack the entire Middle East, to take over the entire Middle East.”

Not all of these are mutually exclusive. But most of them are dubious based upon what we know. (For instance, Trump previously said he “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program in the strikes just nine months ago, and US intelligence doesn’t back up the ICBM claim.) Some of the newer claims are odd given they’re the kinds of things you would seemingly have said earlier (if they were true, at least).

To the extent the administration can’t even pin down why the US is fighting this war, that would seem to be a political problem for how it will be viewed over the longer term.

What does it mean for US support for Israel?

---

Americans’ support for Israel had already declined markedly in recent months and years.

Just a day before the war began, Gallup released a poll showing that, for the first time in a quarter-century of polling, Americans no longer sympathized more with the Israelis than with the Palestinians. Israel has generally led on that measure by 30 to 40 points.

Flames and smoke rise from an oil storage facility struck during the US-Israeli military campaign in Tehran, Iran, on Saturday.

Alireza Sotakbar/ISNA/AP

We’ve also seen growing evidence of antisemitism in the United States, particularly among young people. And some prominent figures on the right have warned about rising antisemitism in their ranks.

Going to war alongside Israel amid all that would seem to open up Pandora’s box.

Israel’s goals in Iran, after all, could be different from the United States’ goals, as could its tolerance for certain tactics. Its weekend attacks on Iranian oil infrastructure, for example, prompted concerns within the Trump administration, and even the hawkish GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham is urging Israel to exercise caution.

Will Democrats put up a united opposition?

---

While Democrats have been opposed to these strikes and seem to have public opinion on their side, that doesn’t mean the issue isn’t without pitfalls for them.

Some of them are Iran hawks. Four House Democrats voted against limiting Trump’s authority last week. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer has also at times been more muted in his opposition to striking Iran than some in the base would like.

And then there’s what Democrats do about a possible supplemental funding bill to support the war.

Do they oppose it outright? Or does that risk looking like they aren’t supporting the military?

Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut told CNN’s Manu Raju that opponents of the war shouldn’t “support an additional dollar for Iran.” But Rep. Jared Moskowitz of Florida had a different view: “The idea of defunding them in the middle of that, that doesn’t seem like the right move to me.”

This funding issue split Democrats when opposition to the Iraq War increased two decades ago. And tough votes could lay ahead.

In a little over a year, the United States has carried out dozens of airstrikes on vessels in the Caribbean tied to alleged narco-trafficking networks, launched sustained operations against Houthi forces in the Red Sea, captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, struck Iranian nuclear facilities and now embarked on an extended military campaign aimed at degrading Tehran’s missile, drone and command infrastructure.

The tempo marks one of the most assertive stretches of American force projection in recent years, spanning Latin America, the Middle East and critical maritime corridors.

For War Secretary Pete Hegseth, it also represents a striking turn.

Just before the 2024 presidential election, he described himself as a “recovering neocon,” expressing regret over his support for Iraq-era interventionism and warning against open-ended wars.

Several analysts say the defining feature of the administration’s approach may be less about ideological evolution and more about alignment and execution.

“Unlike in Trump one, everyone in Trump’s cabinet now — Hegseth, Rubio, etc. — understands that the president is the boss,” said Matthew Kroenig, a defense strategist at the Atlantic Council. “In Trump 1.0 you had some Cabinet officials who thought their job was to save the Republic from Trump, the so-called adults in the room. And so I think it’s pretty clear the president wanted to go in this direction, and I think Hegseth sees himself as supporting the president’s vision.”

‘Validation of … leadership’

That cohesion has coincided with a pattern of risk-taking.

Several of the administration’s most consequential military moves, from Venezuela to the Houthis to the current Iran campaign, carried the potential for escalation.

Some strategists say the relative absence of early blowback from those interventions may have reinforced the administration’s willingness to escalate into the Iranian theater.

“I’m not sure I would have advised this,” Kroenig said of the Iran operation. “It is pretty risky, but it’s going well so far.”

Iranian missile launches have declined in volume. Regional allies have not broken ranks.

Whether that constitutes strategic success, however, depends on the metric.

Justin Fulcher, a former Pentagon adviser to Hegseth, argued the early phases of the campaign reflect what he described as a “return to strategic clarity.”

“Deterrence is only credible when our allies actually believe that if President Trump says something, we will back it up,” Fulcher said. “This is a validation of Secretary Hegseth and President Trump’s leadership.”

Hegseth, a former Army officer who served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, has argued that the current campaign bears little resemblance to those conflicts.

“This is not Iraq. This is not endless. I was there for both,” Hegseth said at a press conference in early March. “Our generation knows better and so does this president.”

In a separate interview, he added, “This is not a remaking of Iranian society from an American perspective. We tried that. The American people have rejected that.”

Danielle Pletka, a senior fellow at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute think tank, said the campaign has unfolded largely as expected.

“I think things have gone reasonably well,” Pletka said, pointing to degraded air defenses and what she described as repeated miscalculations by Iran. “All they’ve really done is made everybody quite mad, and that was a really bad calculation on their part.”

At the same time, she cautioned against interpreting the administration’s actions as part of a fixed doctrine.

“I don’t think that it is doctrinal,” Pletka said. “I think this is ad hoc.”

Some longtime Trump supporters have said the current conflict is not what they expected from Trump, who campaigned on ending wars and “America First.”

“It feels like the worst betrayal this time because it comes from the very man and the admin who we all believed was different and said no more,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., wrote on X. “Instead, we get a war with Iran on behalf of Israel that will succeed in regime in Iran. Another foreign war for foreign people for foreign regime change. For what?”

In Pletka’s view, the president has shown a pattern of attempting diplomacy first and shifting to force only when he concludes negotiations are unserious. She argues that posture distinguishes the current moment from past interventions.

She also emphasized that much of the operational credit belongs to the professional military.

“The planning behind this is credit to the U.S. military and to the CENTCOM commander and to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs,” she said.

‘Success and precision’

That distinction complicates efforts to attribute the current posture solely to Hegseth’s personal worldview. While the defense secretary has become a public face of the administration’s deterrence messaging, the execution of high-tempo campaigns rests heavily with career military leadership.

Some critics argue the administration has yet to clearly articulate an end state for the Iran campaign.

“Pete Hegseth needs to check with his boss on what the objective is,” former national security advisor John Bolton recently said on CNN. “How does Hegseth explain that we’ve already changed the regime, which wasn’t our objective? I think the Pentagon top leadership, civilian top leadership, needs some attitude adjustment. I think the military’s doing fine, but I wonder about the civilian leadership.”

The White House pushed back forcefully on criticism of the campaign.

Anna Kelly, a White House spokesperson, said Monday that Hegseth “is doing an incredible job leading the Department of War,” pointing to what she described as the “ongoing success of Operation Epic Fury” and other missions.

Kelly said Iranian retaliatory attacks “have declined by 90 percent because the Department of War is destroying Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities,” and added that Hegseth works “in lockstep with President Trump every day” to ensure the U.S. military “continues to be the greatest, most powerful fighting force in the world.”

The Pentagon echoed that assessment.

“Operation Epic Fury continues to advance with overwhelming success and precision,” Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell said, describing a “resolute, full-spectrum campaign” aimed at the “total dismantlement of Iran’s terrorist network or its unconditional surrender.”

Others see the moment in broader historical terms.

Peter Doran, a foreign policy analyst, described the campaign as a potential attempt to “end a 47-year war” waged by the Islamic Republic against the United States, but on Washington’s terms.

“This is a clear effort to end a 47-year war that Iran has been waging against the United States,” Doran said.

He argued that visible American military performance could reverberate beyond the Middle East, particularly in Beijing.

“They look good,” Doran said of U.S. forces. “That will serve, I hope, as a disincentive for adventurism.”

If the operation ultimately succeeds in significantly degrading Iran’s military infrastructure, Doran argued, it could reshape the Middle East and expand diplomatic opportunities such as broader Arab-Israeli normalization.

“It changes everything in the Middle East,” he said.

Yet even supporters acknowledge that long-term effects remain uncertain. In Venezuela, Maduro’s removal marked a dramatic shift in U.S. policy, but the governing apparatus he built remains largely intact.

Degrading missile stockpiles and drone infrastructure in Iran may buy time, but whether it produces durable deterrence or simply postpones reconstitution remains to be seen.

For now, the administration’s willingness to take calculated risks and its ability to avoid immediate escalation have reinforced the perception of restored American assertiveness. Whether that assertiveness translates into lasting strategic gains will likely define Hegseth’s tenure far more than the rhetoric that preceded it.

Hegseth and the Pentagon did not respond to requests for comment.

Trump says “the war is very complete,” and he’s considering taking over Strait of Hormuz

March 9, 2026 / 3:53 PM EDT / CBS News

In a phone interview with CBS News Monday afternoon, President Trump said the U.S. war with Iran could almost be over.

“I think the war is very complete, pretty much,” the president said, speaking from his Doral, Florida, golf club. “[Iran has] no navy, no communications, they’ve got no air force. Their missiles are down to a scatter. Their drones are being blown up all over the place, including their manufacturing of drones.”

The U.S. military said it struck over 3,000 Iranian targets in the first week of operations.

“If you look, they have nothing left. There’s nothing left in a military sense,” Mr. Trump said.

Late Sunday, Iran announced that Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei would replace his father as Iran’s supreme leader.

“I have no message for him. None, whatsoever,” the president said, adding that he has someone else in mind to lead the country.

Commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, through which about 20% of the global oil supply flows, has effectively ground to a halt.

The president said the U.S. “could do a lot” about the strait and threatened Iran if it inhibits the waterway. “They’ve shot everything they have to shoot, and they better not try anything cute or it’s going to be the end of that country…If they do anything bad, that would be the end of Iran and you’d never hear the name again.” The president also said the strait is open now and claimed ships have been entering the strait, but said he is still “thinking about taking it over.”

Mr. Trump initially estimated the war would take about a month to complete.

“We’re very far ahead of schedule,” he told CBS News on Monday.

The same afternoon the president said the war is “very complete, pretty much,” the Department of Defense posted on X, “We have Only Just Begun to Fight” and “no mercy.”

So far, seven Americans have died in combat. Later Monday, Vice President JD Vance will attend a dignified transfer of the remains of U.S. Army Sgt. Benjamin Pennington, who died of injuries he suffered in March 1 attack at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia.

Asked whether he thought the war could wrap up soon, the president said, “Wrapping up is all in my mind, nobody else’s.”

California congressman is leaving the Republican Party to become an independent amid tough reelection race

2026-03-09T19:32:04.286Z / CNN

By Aileen Graef, Alison Main

28 min ago

PUBLISHED Mar 9, 2026, 3:32 PM ET

US Rep. Kevin Kiley on Capitol Hill on January 22, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Al Drago/Getty Images

Rep. Kevin Kiley has announced he is leaving the Republican Party effective immediately, making him the only independent member of the US House of Representatives.

The move comes as the California lawmaker is facing a tough bid for reelection in the wake of redistricting in the state led by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom. The decision by the congressman will officially shrink Speaker Mike Johnson’s already razor-thin GOP majority. Kiley, however, will still caucus with Republicans in the chamber, meaning the switch in his party affiliation may not have a significant impact on vote math in the House.

[Related article Speaker of the House Mike Johnson speaks with reporters following a rules vote on funding the US government at the US Capitol on February 3, in Washington, DC. Aaron Schwartz/Getty Images Life inside a chaotic House GOP majority 9 min read]

Pressed on if he’ll continue to be a reliable vote for Johnson, who is operating with the narrowest House margin in decades, Kiley noted that he has already crossed party lines, including on votes to rein in the president’s tariff authorities.

“I approach, you know, every vote with, you know, a mind towards how it’s going to impact the folks that I represent,” he told reporters on Monday.

Kiley said that he has already changed his registration in California to “no party preference” and has asked the House clerk to change how he is identified in the official roster.

The House has been operating with 218 Republicans, including Kiley, and 214 Democrats, which means Johnson has been able to afford only afford a single defection on party-line votes.

The California lawmaker, who has broken with his party on several key issues in his two terms in Congress, said he’ll continue to caucus with House Republicans for the remainder of this term, given that committee assignments are linked to party affiliation.

“I will remain caucusing with the Republicans … for those administrative purposes, but in terms of the way that I approach my role here. I am an independent, and as I have been throughout my time here, I’ll be an independent voice fighting for our district,” he said.

He said he spoke with Johnson over the weekend about his intentions to continue to caucus with the House GOP, but that he had made his decision without input from either party’s leadership.

Asked if he plans to change the party he caucuses with next term if he’s reelected this fall, Kiley responded, “I’m going to do whatever is serves my constituents and so you know that’s a decision that I’ll make at the time.”

Kiley has introduced legislation to prohibit mid-decade redistricting nationwide.

“I have been very strongly opposed to this redistricting war – this epidemic of gerrymandering – across the country, ” he said. “I think it’s a terrible thing for democracy.”

中国高压反腐持续 将制定反跨境腐败法 | 联合早报

[刘柳]北京报道
发布/2026年3月9日 23:30

中国全国人大常委会委员长赵乐际星期一（3月9日）在人大全体会议上，作人大常委会工作报告。 （法新社）

中国在高压反腐态势下进一步推进反腐立法，今年将制定反跨境腐败法。受访学者认为，这部新法律主要针对向境外转移资产的腐败分子，有助追讨资产，也能有效追责。

中国全国人大常委会委员长赵乐际星期一（3月9日）在人大全体会议上作工作报告时说，今后一年要不断完善中国特色社会主义法律体系，聚焦保障“十五五”（2026年至2030年）规划贯彻实施，加强重点领域、新兴领域、涉外领域立法，着力提高立法质量。

工作报告显示，今年将围绕推进反腐败国家立法，制定反跨境腐败法。

“反跨境腐败法”2023年首次出现在十四届全国人大常委会立法规划中，位列“条件比较成熟、任期内拟提请审议的法律草案”的立法项目。

2024年7月举行的中共二十届三中全会通过《决定》，明确推进反腐败国家立法，出台反跨境腐败法。

财新网当时引述多名了解草案起草的学者说，这部法律由中共中央纪委国家监委起草，主要解决中国企业境外分支机构和外国企业在中国境内设立的分支机构的合规管理及管辖程序问题，也有针对腐败行为跨境追赃追逃的规定，是预防性法律。

第一财经引述中国人民大学反腐败与法治研究中心副主任邓矜婷说，新法律中可能会增加一些涉外管辖、涉外查办案件、国际合作方面的规定。

北京师范大学政府管理研究院教授唐任伍接受《联合早报》采访时分析，反跨境腐败法主要针对向境外转移资产的腐败分子，包括“红通人员”，以及出海的国有企业人员。

中国官方上月公布，去年开展“天网”专项行动，追回外逃人员963人，2015年公开的“百名红通人员”亚洲地区实现清零，还有37人在逃亚洲地区以外。

唐任伍说，新法律一方面便于追讨资产，另一方面也能有效追责。他以国企在海外承包工程为例，指一些不正当行为或失职渎职等问题今后将受法律约束。

他说，“一带一路”等海外项目是中国对外开放的重要战略项目，有了清晰明确的法律条文，能更好地实现国际接轨，也能让中国的国际形象大幅提升。

他补充说，对于一些损害中国利益的行为，“不管你在哪个国家，欧洲也好，美国也好，也可以利用这部法律来制裁和追讨”。

人大代表资格终止人数飙升

中国近两年反腐力度不减，随着涉贪官员数量上升，人大代表资格终止人数也同步飙升，过去一年达到58人，超过之前两年总和。

星期一发布的人大常委会报告披露，过去一年补选代表七人、终止代表资格58人，其中罢免55人，辞职三人。

2024年和2025年的报告则显示，前一年终止代表资格人数分别为24人和30人，补选代表分别为三人。这意味着，过去一年，终止和增补人数均超过前两年总和，使本届全国人大代表人数从原有的2977人减至2878人。

去年被罢免的人大代表中，不少为解放军前高级将领。中国两会（人大、政协年会）开幕前夕，全国人大常委会会议公告罢免的19名全国人大代表中，就有九名为军方代表，其中五人为上将，包括陆军原司令员李桥铭以及海军原司令员沈金龙。

此前被官宣落马的中共中央军委副主席张又侠和军委委员刘振立，目前仍在全国人大代表名单中。

右手不慎卷入榨甘蔗机 果汁摊主受困两小时后送院

发布/2026年3月9日 23:43 | 联合早报

亚历山大村美食中心一名果汁摊摊主的右手，不慎卷入榨甘蔗机内，民防人员和国大医院医护人员经过两小时抢救，才让他脱困。 （张俊杰摄）

亚历山大村美食中心一名果汁摊摊主，疑在工作时右手不慎卷入榨甘蔗机内，受困约两小时后在民防人员和国大医院医护人员的协助下脱困送院。

这起事故发生在星期一（3月9日）晚上约8时45分，《联合早报》接获读者通报，指一名果汁摊摊主的右手不慎卷入榨甘蔗机内。

记者晚上10时15分抵达时，救援工作仍在进行，十多名民防人员正围着果汁摊的档口，使用不同的工具救援，现场停着至少三辆民防车辆和一辆警车，其中还包括一辆灾难拯救队（DART）的车辆。

约四名伤者的亲友坐在果汁摊前的椅子上，一名相信是伤者妻子的妇人与另一名年轻男子神情悲伤，不时捂住眼睛流泪。

不愿具名的肉骨茶摊摊主说，事发时美食中心已经没有多少人，只有两三名顾客在果汁摊前排队买饮料。

她没有听到任何求救声或哀嚎，直到看到警察和民防人员才知道出事了。“受伤的摊主60多岁，在这里经营了十多年，平时为人开朗幽默。”

救援工作直到晚上10时45分许才结束，一名头发花白、身穿花衬衫的老者在医护人员的搀扶下，坐上担架前往医院救治。据观察，他的右手无名指和小拇指被包扎，脸色看起来有些虚弱，露出痛苦的表情。

女皇镇单选区议员蔡瑞隆也在晚上11时左右到场慰问伤者的家属，逗留约15分钟后离开。

新加坡民防部队受询时说，消防员、灾难拯救队队员和医护人员一同展开救援行动。医护人员在整个救援过程中，为伤者止痛并持续监测他的生命体征。

国大医院紧急医疗团队也派医护人员到场提供援助。最终，伤者的右手成功从机器中脱困后，他被送往国大医院接受进一步治疗。