标签： North America

In a historic bipartisan rebuke of the ongoing military conflict between the United States and Iran that launched in late February, the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate has passed a concurrent resolution ordering President Donald Trump to either halt all military operations against Iran or secure formal congressional authorization to continue any offensive action. The final vote tally stood at 50 to 48 on Tuesday, with four sitting Republican senators breaking ranks with their party leadership to join Democrats in supporting the measure. The outcome marks the first public, bipartisan show of opposition to the war since hostilities began four months ago, following an earlier House of Representatives vote in June that also saw cross-party support for the same resolution.

Despite its passage in both chambers of Congress, the measure carries no legal weight and will not be forwarded to the White House for Trump’s signature, rendering it largely symbolic in its current form. Legal scholars note that the resolution could still face court challenges, however, and its passage marks an unprecedented milestone: this is the first time since the 1973 War Powers Resolution was enacted that both chambers of Congress have approved a concurrent resolution directing a sitting president to end an active military engagement.

The resolution’s approval comes amid growing national and international pressure on the Trump administration to wrap up the conflict, which has sent global energy markets into turmoil. Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz — a critical global shipping chokepoint that carries roughly 20% of the world’s crude oil and liquefied natural gas supplies — has caused petrol prices to spike sharply across the United States, while public polling shows steadily rising opposition to the war among American voters.

Just one week before the Senate vote, leaders from both Washington and Tehran signed a memorandum of understanding to extend an existing ceasefire and work toward a full end to hostilities. Clashes over the fine details of the interim agreement continue, however, leaving the final status of the conflict uncertain.

The vote also lays bare deep internal divisions within the Republican Party, which currently holds a narrow majority in the Senate. Four GOP senators — Rand Paul, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, and Bill Cassidy — crossed the aisle to vote with Democrats, while two additional Republican senators, including Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, were absent from the vote. Only one Democratic senator, John Fetterman, broke with his party to vote against the resolution. The combination of defections and absences created the narrow margin needed for the resolution to pass.

Under existing U.S. federal law, the president is required to secure congressional approval for any military engagement that lasts longer than 60 days. The U.S., alongside Israel, launched the initial strikes against Iran on February 28. The Trump administration has argued that multiple ceasefire agreements have reset the 60-day clock, and the president can also extend the deadline by an additional 30 days on national security grounds.

To recap the timeline of the conflict: After the U.S.-Israeli strikes in February, Iran launched retaliatory attacks against Israel and U.S. allied states in the Persian Gulf, before closing the Strait of Hormuz to global shipping. In April, Washington announced a full naval blockade of all commercial traffic moving to and from Iran’s coast. An initial ceasefire reached in April collapsed almost immediately, leading to last week’s interim MoU aimed at securing a permanent end to fighting. The BBC has reached out to the White House for comment on Tuesday’s Senate vote, with no immediate response as of publication.

In a surprising split decision that breaks with recent pro-religious-liberty trends on the nation’s highest court, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled 6-3 that a former Louisiana prison inmate cannot seek monetary damages from individual correctional officials who forcibly shaved his religiously mandated dreadlocks. The decision centers on a key interpretation of the 2000 Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), a federal law designed to protect religious freedom for incarcerated people held in federally funded facilities.

The case stems from a 2020 incident during which Damon Landor, who was serving a sentence for a drug conviction, was handcuffed to a chair and had his dreadlocks shaved off by prison staff—despite his explicit objections that the act violated core tenets of his Rastafarian faith. For Rastafarians, growing and maintaining uncut, uncombed dreadlocks is far more than a personal style choice: it is a longstanding symbol of spiritual devotion, connection to their faith, and religious growth. In comments following the ruling, Landor emphasized that his dreadlocks were an integral part of his identity, noting, “So when they cut off my hair, they cut off my crown.”

Writing for the conservative majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch argued that RLUIPA, which was passed under Congress’s Spending Clause authority, does not permit private citizens to bring damage claims against individual state employees in their personal capacity. Gorsuch held that Congress lacks the direct regulatory authority to impose personal liability on state officials under this clause, and that state employees never explicitly consented to such personal lawsuits when the law was enacted in 2000. As a result, the majority concluded, Landor is not entitled to the monetary damages he sought against the individual prison officials involved in the incident.

The ruling marks a clear break from a string of recent Supreme Court decisions where the conservative majority consistently sided with parties bringing religious liberty claims against government entities. In a sharp dissent, liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson pushed back against the majority’s interpretation, arguing that the core legislative purpose of RLUIPA was explicitly to guarantee that state and local prison systems respect the constitutionally protected right of incarcerated people to practice their faith freely. Jackson and the two other liberal justices rejected the majority’s narrow reading of the law, warning that it undermines the protections RLUIPA was intended to provide for incarcerated people of all faiths.

The iconic Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, a centerpiece of Washington D.C.’s National Mall stretching more than 2,000 feet between the Lincoln Memorial and Washington Monument, is scheduled to be drained for a second time just weeks after a $16 million renovation project wrapped up. The sudden new round of repairs comes after U.S. President Donald Trump publicly blamed unknown vandals for causing the wide range of issues that have derailed the recently finished upgrade.

In a series of public comments starting Monday, Trump outlined multiple alleged acts of sabotage against the landmark. He initially claimed perpetrators had left a 300-foot gash in the pool’s structure, illegally dumped chemicals into the water, and destroyed newly planted surrounding grass. By that afternoon, speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, he revised the size of the reported cut to 350 feet, adding that unconfirmed reports suggested fertilizer may have been introduced to the water – a move that would explain the rampant algal growth that has turned the pool’s once-clear water bright green. The president did not provide any evidence to back his claims of deliberate vandalism, nor did he name any individuals or groups he suspected of involvement.

Even before Trump’s allegations of sabotage, the newly renovated pool had already begun to show significant problems. The deep blue paint that Trump specified for the pool’s bottom has started peeling off in large sections, which are now floating to the surface and being removed by visiting tourists. National Park Service crews have already attempted to curb the algal bloom by pouring hydrogen peroxide into the water, but the efforts have not resolved the discoloration issue. This is not the first time the Reflecting Pool, originally constructed in the 1920s, has faced long-term problems: for decades, the landmark has struggled with persistent leaks, structural decay, broken piping, algal overgrowth and bird waste buildup. Previous large-scale renovations carried out during the Obama and Biden administrations cost more than $100 million total, per Trump’s claims, and never resolved the ongoing issues.

The District of Columbia Water Authority confirmed Monday that it has issued the necessary permit to drain the pool for repairs. The contractor that completed the original renovation has stated it will cover the cost of all new fixes under the project’s warranty. Both the DC Water Authority and the National Park Service have been contacted for additional comment by major media outlets, with no additional statements released as of yet.

Trump has echoed aggressive threats from Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, who has pledged to vigorously prosecute anyone found responsible for damaging the pool. In a post to his Truth Social platform Monday, the president warned that intentional damage (or even attempted damage) to national landmarks carries a maximum 10-year prison sentence, and that this penalty will be fully enforced against any perpetrator.

In addition to his pursuit of vandals, Trump also announced that his administration is preparing to file a lawsuit against ABC News over the outlet’s reporting on the Reflecting Pool issues. The president argued that ABC’s coverage was inaccurate, claiming the network failed to report that previous Democratic administrations spent more than $100 million on renovations that never produced a working, well-maintained pool. He asserted that his own $16 million project was delivered successfully, and that any current problems stem solely from vandalism, adding that the scope of his administration’s renovation ended up being far larger than initially planned, covering surrounding green spaces and sidewalks as well. Trump also said any financial damages awarded in the lawsuit against ABC would be directed straight to the U.S. Treasury. ABC News has been contacted for comment on the threatened lawsuit but has not yet issued a response.

As discussions over the United Kingdom’s next prime minister intensify, a key question has emerged on the international stage: what policy priorities and alignment does former U.S. President Donald Trump seek from Britain’s next leader? What was once an unexpected close rapport between Trump and Keir Starmer, the leader of the UK’s Labour Party, has rapidly deteriorated in the wake of rising conflict in Iran, reshaping the potential transatlantic political landscape. The sudden shift in relations has left political analysts speculating about how Trump’s preferences for 10 Downing Street will evolve amid growing regional tensions in the Middle East. Early signs of a productive working relationship between the two leaders have given way to clear divisions, rooted in competing approaches to the escalating crisis in Iran. This breakdown has altered expectations for how a future UK premiership would interact with Trump, should he return to the White House, and highlights the deep impact that Middle Eastern geopolitics can have on Anglo-American political ties.