标签： North America

Nancy Pelosi, the trailblazing first female Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, announced on Thursday, November 6, 2025, that she will not seek re-election in 2026, marking the end of a storied four-decade career in Congress. Pelosi, 85, who has been a progressive Democratic icon and a frequent target of Republican criticism, made the announcement in a heartfelt video posted on X. Her decision comes shortly after California voters approved ‘Proposition 50,’ a redistricting initiative aimed at securing five additional House seats for Democrats in the upcoming midterm elections. Pelosi’s career has been defined by her fierce battles for control of the House and her high-profile clashes with former President Donald Trump during his first term from 2017 to 2020. Her retirement underscores a broader generational shift within the Democratic Party, as younger leaders push for change. Pelosi’s legacy includes her pivotal role in passing the Affordable Care Act under President Barack Obama and her relentless advocacy for human rights and LGBTQ+ equality. Her departure will leave a significant void in the Democratic leadership, though Representative Hakeem Jeffries is poised to step into her shoes. Pelosi’s tenure has been marked by both historic achievements and intense partisan strife, including two impeachment efforts against Trump and a harrowing attack on her husband in 2022. As she prepares to leave Congress, Pelosi’s impact on American politics remains indelible.

A federal judge has mandated the Trump administration to fully finance the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly referred to as food stamps, condemning the administration for allegedly withholding food aid for political motives. Judge John McConnell, in his ruling on Thursday, emphasized the dire consequences of withholding aid, stating that “16 million children are immediately at risk of going hungry.” SNAP, utilized by approximately 42 million Americans—about one in eight—assists low-income individuals in purchasing groceries. Initially, the administration intended to cease all funding this month due to the ongoing government shutdown, the longest in U.S. history. However, they were later instructed to disburse at least partial payments. Judge McConnell, based in Rhode Island, also rebuked President Donald Trump for suggesting that benefits would only be distributed post-shutdown. He approved a petition from various local governments and non-profit organizations, demanding full food benefits instead of the 65% previously ordered for this month. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge McConnell set a deadline for benefit payments by Friday, deeming any further delay “simply unacceptable.” He asserted, “This should never happen in America.” Over 42 million Americans depend on SNAP benefits, yet the program has been in jeopardy during the prolonged shutdown. Although individual states manage the benefits, the program relies on federal funding, which has been suspended since October 1. Last month, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), overseeing SNAP, announced it would cease distributing food-assistance funds starting November 1, citing a lack of funds. Half the states and the District of Columbia have sued the administration over the food-aid freeze, arguing their legal obligation to maintain the program. Federal judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island ruled that the administration must utilize $5.25 billion in emergency funds for at least partial payments. SNAP, costing about $8 billion monthly, enables low-income Americans to purchase groceries through reloadable debit cards. On average, a family of four receives $715 monthly, equating to less than $6 per person daily. Amid funding uncertainties, local governments have directed recipients to charity food pantries, which have initiated emergency drives. Additionally, cost-saving recipes have gained popularity online as Americans seek ways to manage their budgets.

In a significant legal development, the U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily allowed the Trump administration’s policy requiring passports to display an individual’s biological sex at birth. The conservative-majority court issued an unsigned order on Thursday, freezing a lower court’s decision from Massachusetts that had blocked the policy. The court argued that displaying birth sex on passports does not violate equal protection principles, likening it to displaying a person’s country of birth. This decision marks a reversal of the Biden administration’s policy, which permitted individuals to self-select their gender on passports, including a third ‘X’ option for non-binary individuals. The Supreme Court’s ruling suggests that the Trump administration is likely to succeed in its legal challenge, potentially leading to a final decision upholding the birth sex requirement. The court’s three liberal justices dissented, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson criticizing the conservative majority for ‘senseless sidestepping of the obvious equitable outcome.’ The plaintiffs in the case argued that the policy could lead to harassment and violence against transgender individuals. This decision is part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to roll back policies related to transgender rights and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The State Department had previously allowed passport sex designations to differ from birth sex with medical documentation since 1992. In April, a Massachusetts judge had deemed the Trump policy discriminatory, rooted in ‘irrational prejudice,’ and a violation of equal protection rights under the Fifth Amendment. However, the Supreme Court’s latest action has temporarily halted the enforcement of that ruling.

A Washington DC protester, Sean Dunn, has been acquitted of misdemeanor assault charges after a viral video showed him throwing a sandwich at a US border patrol agent. The incident, which occurred on August 10, has become a symbol of local opposition to President Donald Trump’s deployment of federal agents and National Guard troops to the city. Dunn, 37, did not deny the act but argued it was not criminal. The jury’s verdict followed a two-day trial, during which Customs and Border Patrol agent Gregory Lairmore testified about the sandwich ‘exploding all over him’ and leaving stains on his uniform. Dunn, who was fired from his job as a paralegal in the Department of Justice after the incident, expressed relief at the acquittal, stating he was ‘looking forward to moving on with my life.’ Initially, government prosecutors sought felony charges, but a grand jury declined to indict him, leading to the lesser misdemeanor charge. The deployment of troops to Washington DC this summer sparked outrage among residents, who viewed it as a politicization of the military. The White House defended the move as necessary to combat crime. During the trial, Lairmore recounted the incident, describing how the sandwich’s impact was felt through his ballistic vest and how he became the subject of jokes among colleagues. Dunn’s lawyer, Julia Gatto, argued that the widespread humor surrounding the incident demonstrated it was not a serious assault. The case has highlighted the ongoing tensions between local residents and federal authorities in the nation’s capital.