Thirty years after rapper Tupac Shakur was killed in a Las Vegas drive-by shooting, a former gang leader has been found guilty of orchestrating his death.

A jury in Clark County, Nev., convicted Duane “Keffe D” Davis, 63, ex-head of Los Angeles street gang South Side Compton Crips, of first-degree murder with the use of a deadly weapon, following a weekslong trial. 

But prosecutors decided not to proceed with part of the charge about gang enhancement—an extra prison sentence added to a conviction when the crime is committed for the benefit of, or in connection with, a criminal gang—citing “witness logistics.” 

Shakur’s murder in September 1996 at the age of 25 had left so many questions unanswered and has been the subject of conspiracies for years. 

But the investigation into his death was revived after Davis published his memoir, Compton Street Legend, in 2019. In the memoir and during promotions, he outlined the role of the Crips in Shakur’s death. The Crips were feuding with the Mob Piru, which had ties to Shakur ​and his record label, Death Row Records. 

Nevada law allows Davis to be charged with murder even if he did not pull the trigger.

Davis, who was arrested in 2023, could face life in prison. Clark County District Court Judge Carli Kierny ordered that Davis  be held without bail and scheduled his sentencing on Oct. 13. 

The former gang leader, however, said in court that he would appeal the conviction. 

How the verdict was reached

The trial against Davis began on Aug. 17. More than two dozen witnesses testified before a panel of 16 jurors, four of whom are alternates. Jurors also watched footage about the fight that broke out a few hours before Shakur and Death Row Records co-founder Marion “Suge” Knight, who was riding with him, were shot by a man in a white Cadillac on Sept. 7, 1996, while Shakur’s car stopped at a red light.

Knight survived, but Shakur died six days later.

Read More: 30 Years After Tupac Shakur Was Killed, a Murder Trial Begins

Throughout the trial, Davis's defense attorney, Michael Sanft, attempted to discredit the evidence against his client. 

In his closing arguments, which lasted for more than an hour, Sanft argued that the prosecution lacked the physical evidence to connect Davis to the crime scene and to determine that Davis called the shots in Shakur’s death. He also claimed the investigation was compromised, and that the Compton Police Department, which probed the local gang rivalry that provided the backdrop for the shooting, was also shut down due to corruption.

“We’re not giving you everything,” Sanft told the jurors. “And you as jurors deserve everything—in terms of the full weight of the evidence in this case. We don’t have it.”

Sanft also repeatedly attacked Davis’ memoir, saying that his client did not even read the book and that his client was telling stories to make money.

“When you think about Mr. Davis's statements, they all conflict,” Sanft told the jurors. “They conflict with the book and they conflict with the facts. And the only thing that we have that we can agree on is that Tupac Shakur was shot and killed.”

But Chief Deputy District Attorney Binu Palal emphasized the extent of evidence against Davis. Palal highlighted the defendant’s own statements over the years, in which he said he played an integral role in Shakur’s killing, including to  documentary filmmakers, in his memoir, and to the police. 

Davis told federal agents in 1998 that he had been in Las Vegas when Shakur was shot but denied knowing who killed him. The case lacked credible witnesses and the investigation stalled. But ten years later, when Davis was under threat of possible drug charges, he told police that he and his fellow Crips members looked for Shakur and Knight. Davis offered the information under a proffer agreement that he believed protected him from being prosecuted.

Prosecutors said that Shakur’s and Knight’s involvement in the beating of Davis’ nephew at the MGM Grand hotel and casino after a Mike Tyson bout prompted retaliation.

In the closing argument, Palal also played a recording of an interview where Davis urged purchases of his 2019 memoir to get the “real truth,” which counts as “textbook” admission of his statements.

“For nearly 18 years, Duane Davis has told the police, television, books, YouTube interviewers, anybody that will listen,” Palal said in his closing statement. “He has told you he is responsible for the murder of Tupac Shakur. Tell him you hear him. Find him guilty.”

The jury deliberated for less than three hours before reaching the verdict.

What are the reactions to the verdict?

The verdict comes two weeks before the 30th anniversary of Shakur’s death.

Footage from the courtroom shows that after the verdict was read, Sekyiwa “Set” Shakur, Tupac’s sister, wept while reaching for a person behind her. Some of Shakur’s other loved ones in the courtroom embraced each other, with one raising his fist in the air

But the reactions to the verdict were not limited to family members, as Shakur's 1996 killing became a defining moment of hip-hop culture's “gangsta” rap era—which reflected the violence pervasive in American inner cities that suffer from poverty.

Shakur fan Derrick Lee Stanton Jr. called the jury's conviction of Davis a “great moment” and “emotional.” But speaking to reporters outside, Stanton said that the case is “not done,” claiming that there are “more people that have to pay for the death of Tupac” as Duane is “not the lone soldier here.”

Two people have died and more than a dozen others are missing or unaccounted for after a flash flood ripped through the Grand Canyon over the weekend, according to park service officials.

The National Park Service (NPS) wrote in a social media post on Monday that two bodies have been recovered, with search and rescue efforts ongoing. The NPS earlier shared late Sunday night that rescuers had found the body of a 46-year-old man near Crystal Rapids along the Colorado River. It has not provided any further information about the deceased.

Read More: Nepal Flash Flooding Leaves Hundreds Dead

In a separate statement on Sunday, the agency asked the public for information on 15 individuals who may be missing or remain unaccounted for. As of Sunday morning, 62 people had been evacuated from Phantom Ranch and the lower North Kaibab Trail, and more were expected to be evacuated in nearby areas, NPS officials added.

NPS asked those who know of hikers or backpackers in the inner canyon along the Bright Angel Creek corridor on Saturday, “as well as anyone who had a campground reservation in the affected corridor,” to provide information.

The continuing search may be impacted by rain and thunderstorms that have been forecasted in the area, the agency warned on Monday.

How the Grand Canyon flash flooding unfolded

The flash-flood event occurred in Bright Angel Canyon and the Phantom Ranch area on Saturday afternoon at around 2:30 p.m. Arizona is currently in the throes of the monsoon season, and storms poured over the Grand Canyon from early Saturday morning and returned in the evening. 

Nearly all footbridges over Bright Angel Creek were destroyed in the floods, the Park Service said, preventing hikers from crossing. NPS is continuing to assess the extent of the damage. Parts of the canyon—Phantom Ranch, Bright Angel Campground, the Phantom Ranch Canteen and cabins, and the entire North Kaibab Trail from the North Kaibab Trailhead to Phantom Ranch—were closed until further notice. 

The Transcanyon Waterline, a 12.5-mile pipeline in the Grand Canyon that carries water for drinking and fire suppression has also been damaged. With that pipeline out of action, the park has a limited water supply and has resorted to conservation measures. 

The National Park Service warns of ongoing risk

Other restrictions have been imposed following the floods. By Monday, all concessions inside the park will end overnight accommodations. Only dry camping—camping without utility hookups to water or sewage—will be allowed on the South Rim, and fires on the South Rim and inner canyon areas will be prohibited.

NPS also warned that flash floods may recur and cause debris flow, as thunderstorms and heavy rainfall are anticipated until Monday.

The National Weather Service in Flagstaff, Ariz. has issued a flash flood watch, urging caution in flood-prone areas like creeks, slot canyons, and low water crossings, among others.

President Donald Trump vowed on Monday that the U.S. will strike Iran “hard” after the two countries exchanged their first publicly confirmed attacks in weeks.

Trump told Fox News’ Trey Yingst that “there will be a response” to strikes Iran launched against U.S. forces in Jordan overnight in retaliation for an American attack on an island in the Strait of Hormuz.

“We're going to hit them hard,” the President said, according to Yingst.

Trump’s threat comes after U.S. forces attacked two Iranian rocket launchers on Larak Island on Sunday, marking a resumption of military action after a roughly month-long pause.

CENTCOM spokesperson Capt. Tim Hawkins confirmed the strike in a statement to TIME, adding that Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) forces “were observed preparing to launch rockets with sea mines” into the strait. 

Last week, U.S. forces finished clearing sea mines from the strait’s international shipping routes. 

“U.S. forces are monitoring the area closely and remain prepared to protect the free flow of commerce through this essential waterway,” Hawkins added.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) issued a statement soon after the U.S. strikes that was carried by Iranian state news agency IRNA, saying that Iran would respond to the attacks on Larak Island “with punishment for the aggressor.”

The IRGC later said in a statement early Monday local time that it had launched ballistic missiles at a U.S. air base in Jordan and warned that “every shot will be met with more devastating responses,” IRNA reported. Jordan’s armed forces said they intercepted eight missiles that entered the country’s airspace early Monday morning.

In a statement, CENTCOM rebuffed the Revolutionary Guards’ claims, describing the Sunday attack as “limited, precise action against IRGC minelaying forces posing an imminent threat” to the strait.

A pause in attacks

Before the Sunday strikes, the last time the U.S. military confirmed targeting Iran was on July 29, announcing a “heavy wave of strikes” on dozens of IRGC targets in Iran, including command centers, missile and drone facilities, and coastal surveillance and defense sites.

On Aug. 1, President Donald Trump said that he agreed to “hold off” strikes in Iran at the request of the U.S.’s regional allies in the Middle East. 

How the U.S.-Iran war began

The strikes mark the latest escalation in the war, which began on Feb. 28 when the U.S. and Israel launched a wave of attacks across Iran. Trump described the operation as a “massive and ongoing” campaign intended to eliminate what he called imminent threats from the Iranian regime and openly encouraged Iranians to overthrow their government.

The attacks came after U.S.-Iranian negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear program failed to produce an agreement and amid the Iranian government’s deadly crackdown on nationwide protests. Trump had accused Iran of rebuilding its nuclear capabilities following U.S. and Israeli strikes on three major Iranian nuclear sites in June 2025. Iran has consistently denied seeking a nuclear weapon.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in the opening salvo of the Feb. 28 campaign. Iran retaliated by firing missiles at Israel, U.S. military bases and other sites across the Middle East, widening the conflict throughout the region.

The war also led Iran to militarize and largely close the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important energy transit routes, through which about a fifth of global oil production typically passed before the hostilities. 

A U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports was lifted under a June agreement, but Trump reimposed it after that deal and its accompanying cease-fire fell apart.

Republican Rep. Chuck Edwards of North Carolina is appealing to his House colleagues not to censure him over his conduct toward two female staffers.

Edwards dropped his re-election bid on Aug. 5 following an Aug. 3 House Ethics Committee report that found the Republican lawmaker had “engaged in persistent unprofessional and inappropriate conduct” toward the two staffers. The panel recommended Edwards’ censure, and a vote is expected next week.

Ahead of the vote, however, Edwards wrote a six-page letter addressed to other House members defending himself, saying that while he recognizes some of his colleagues may view his interactions differently, “context matters” in assessing them.

“An affectionate friendship is not a sexual proposition,” Edwards wrote in the letter, dated Aug. 25 and first obtained by NOTUS and reported on Thursday. “A gift is not sexual misconduct. A compliment is not sexual misconduct. Poetry is not sexual misconduct. Socializing with a colleague is not sexual misconduct. Caring deeply about someone with whom you have worked and come to know for years is not sexual misconduct.”

The 65-year-old lawmaker noted that the panel concluded he had “neither engaged in sexual activity with nor explicitly propositioned any individual staff member,” that he “did not violate federal sexual harassment law,” and that “the allegations in this matter do not implicate quid pro quo sexual harassment.” He claimed in the letter that his behavior toward the two staffers was similar to that toward his other staff—including gifts he’d given and trips he’d taken with or arranged for them.

Attached to the letter was a one-page factsheet and a memo submitted by Edwards’ counsel to the House committee responding to the report. Edwards alleged the panel had cherry-picked certain evidence to fit a narrative.

While censure does not remove a House member from office, it is one of the strongest forms of public rebuke in the chamber. A majority vote is required to censure a lawmaker.

TIME did not immediately hear back from Edwards’ office or the House ethics panel when asked for comment.

Edwards is one of several House lawmakers who has faced allegations of sexual misconduct this year.

Former Reps. Eric Swalwell of California, a Democrat, and Tony Gonzales of Texas, a Republican, resigned in April under bipartisan pressure from their colleagues and threats of expulsion amid separate allegations. 

Besides Edwards, the House ethics panel is also investigating allegations against Republican Rep. Cory Mills of Florida, who lost his Aug. 18 primary. 

On Aug. 17, the panel also announced it was reviewing allegations that Democratic Rep. Jimmy Gomez of California may have engaged in inappropriate sexual contact with a House staffer.

What the committee found regarding Edwards

The ethics panel report found that the two women involved, who previously worked with Edwards from since he was a State Senator, “were subject to increasingly unusual attention from the Congressman while they worked for him, creating an environment where both they and their coworkers felt uncomfortable.”

The panel detailed some of the alleged instances. In one, Edwards allegedly told one of his female staffers, who was in her early 20s and had rejected a dinner request because of rumors surrounding Rep. Edwards and a staffer, that it was “disappointing to feel something that used to be easy has gotten complicated.”

Per the report, Edwards had given the two staffers several gifts, including jewelry worth over $1,000, as well as “designer purses, guns, shoes, flowers, a laptop and cell phone, KitchenAid mixer, robotic vacuum, vacations, tickets to performances, and one-on-one dinners.” 

Edwards, according to the report, also went to the house of the staffer in her 20s to “perform chores like yardwork, pick her up and drop her off for events and activities with his driver, and decorate her Christmas tree together (for which he skipped votes in the House that evening).” It also stated that Edwards wrote a poem for one of the staffers that he read aloud at her going away party in the congressional office. 

The report added that Edwards was, “at minimum blind to that reality, and at worst, dismissive of the impact his inappropriate conduct had on the careers and wellbeing of two women on his staff.” 

Current House rules state members are disallowed to engage in “unwelcome sexual advances or conduct” toward any employee. Edwards insisted in his letter that he’s not asking anyone to approve of his behavior, but argued “many of the activities emphasized by the report are not themselves prohibited.” 

How have Edwards’ colleagues reacted to his letter?

The condemnation has come from across the political aisle.

Rep. Kat Cammack of Florida, who chairs the Republican Women's Caucus, posted on X that “22 pages of explanation do not change a fundamental fact: Members of Congress hold extraordinary power over their staff. With that power comes a responsibility to exercise sound judgment and maintain appropriate boundaries.”

Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández of New Mexico, chair of the Democratic Women’s Caucus, in a statement to CNN and others, referred to the letter as “22 pages of ramblings by someone who refuses to understand sexual harassment or his abusive power over the women who worked for him. His lack of remorse speaks for itself.” 

Federal officials on Wednesday announced they had disrupted a yearslong Chinese hacking campaign that compromised or targeted several U.S. institutions, including NASA, the Federal Reserve, and even the Senate.

The Justice Department said in a statement it had seized internet domains used by two hacking platforms, called “QScan” and “QTRouter,” that were created and operated by a Chinese state-sponsored group. The platforms were used to target U.S. critical infrastructure and other sensitive networks. FBI Director Kash Patel said tools were used by Chinese government actors “to hide the origin of their attacks.”

An attached affidavit from an FBI agent accused the state-sponsored group, referred to as “QTFY,” of targeting the Department of Energy, Department of Justice, Department of Health and Human Services, and the National Institutes of Health. The group also allegedly targeted networks “operated by hospitals, telecommunications providers, power companies, financial institutions, and defense contractors.”

The DOJ’s announcement did not specify if anybody had been charged or apprehended in relation to the hacking, and the extent of what has been compromised remains unclear. TIME has reached out to the DOJ for comment.

The group’s hacking activity, which dates back to 2018 according to the FBI, adds to an ongoing record of U.S. allegations of Chinese state-backed cyberespionage operations.

A spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, D.C. pushed back against the accusations in a statement to TIME, insisting that China is a “firm defender” of cybersecurity.

“China firmly opposes the U.S. overstretching the concept of national security and using it as a pretext to impose discriminatory restrictions on Chinese companies and will firmly safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies,” the spokesperson said, urging the U.S. to stop using such issues to “smear or discredit” the country.

A yearslong hacking campaign

QTFY members, according to the DOJ affidavit, include former members of the People’s Liberation Army—China’s military forces—who used their PLA relationships “to obtain contracts and subcontracts supporting offensive cyber operations.” The QTFY actors were allegedly employed by the Nanjing Xinjiuwei Network Technology Company, which “conducts malicious cyber activities” for the Chinese government, per the FBI.

The affidavit stated that not all of the attempted intrusions had been successful.

In August 2019, the group failed in attempting to break into NASA's server by exploiting a vulnerability in its virtual private network.

In September 2024, QTFY actors conducted computer intrusions at three unnamed laboratories of the Department of Energy, the NIH, an HHS agency, and another unnamed U.S. security device manufacturer.

Other efforts by the hacking group were detailed in a joint cybersecurity advisory authored by the FBI, the National Security Agency, and the U.S. Cyber Command's Cyber National Mission Force.

According to the advisory, the group conducted a vulnerability scan of the U.S. Senate and an American hospital system in March 2026, and of an unidentified U.S. election system in June 2026. Both attempts to gain access to these networks failed.

Speaking to Fox News, Attorney General Todd Blanche said Wednesday that the operation has been happening for many years and is a “major national security issue” for the U.S., adding that the authorities have not only stopped the operation, but have also shared the information with the private sector to stop further attempts.

Cybersecurity has been a source of tension between the U.S. and China—two geopolitical rivals.

The 2026 Annual Threat Assessment from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence says China “is the most active and persistent cyber threat to U.S. Government, private-sector, and critical infrastructure networks.”

In 2023, the U.S. identified and disrupted operations by Chinese state-sponsored group Volt Typhoon to intrude into U.S. energy, transportation and water networks, to potentially sabotage operations during geopolitical crises. The following year, Chinese government-linked hackers were said to have targeted the phone communications of President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance, who were then running for office, as part of a larger cyber-espionage campaign.

The Justice Department’s latest announcement comes a month before Trump’s counterpart Xi Jinping is expected to head to the U.S. amid continuing disputes in trade and technology.

As to whether Trump should bring up the alleged hacking from China when Xi visits, Blanche said he would not tell the President what to discuss.

“This is something that we have talked about with our counterparts in China for many, many years. And we know that it’s happening. And they know that we know that it’s happening. And it has to stop,” he added.

More than 300 people have been killed and at least 900 are missing after devastating flash floods swept through the Himalayan region along the Nepal-Tibet border, local officials confirmed Thursday.

Severe flooding was reported across the districts of Rasuwa, Nuwakot, Dhading, and Gorkha, north of the Nepalese capital Kathmandu early Wednesday. Much of the flooding occurred along the Trishuli and Bhotekoshi rivers in the north of the country.

The Nepali tourism board said that, based on records from travel and trekking firms, 644 travelers are still out of contact. More than a hundred of those are Indian nationals who were on pilgrimage to Mount Kailash in Tibet, a Nepali tourism official is quoted as telling the Associated Press.

Thursday’s count from the tourism board shows 65 missing travelers are from the U.S., and the State Department said it was aware of the Americans impacted by the floods. Among the others still unaccounted for are foreign nationals from Canada, the United Kingdom, Malaysia, Australia, Japan, and Singapore.

The U.S. embassy in Nepal issued a warning to U.S. citizens in Rasuwa, Nuwakot, Dhading, Gorkha, Chitwan, and Tanahun, urging them to “stay away from riverbanks and low-lying areas, seek higher ground, and follow local instructions.” The embassy added that it was working to account for Americans affected by the flooding.

Nepali Prime Minister Balendra Shah met with local Members of Parliament (MPs) on Wednesday to discuss issues including flood damage, condition of settlements in local areas, rescue and relief work, his office said. 

“The government has intensified the search and rescue operations by deploying security forces in the flood-affected areas,” Shah’s office added.

What do we know about the floods?

It remains unclear what caused the floods, but Nepal is highly vulnerable to the climate crisis.

The U.S. Geological Survey reported initial shaking as an earthquake, though it later determined that the tremors were caused by “a glacial collapse and debris flow that caused subsequent catastrophic impacts downstream.” That event generated seismic energy equivalent to a 5.2-magnitude quake.

The Kathmandu Post reported, citing the country’s national disaster authority, that an initial analysis of satellite imagery from Planet Labs indicated that an avalanche of ice and rock triggered the flood in the Lhende River, about 20 km (12 mi) north-east of the Rasuwagadhi border crossing between China and Nepal.

Nepal has thousands of glaciers, but with the Himalayan region warming, many of them are melting.

How Nepal is responding to the crisis

Data from the disaster risk reduction agency also showed that of the more than 900 missing, 28 are Nepali police, 44 are from the Nepali Army, and 13 are from its specialized paramilitary Armed Police Force.

Nepali Police published details of 66 people hospitalized due to injuries from the flooding, most of whom are from the Nuwakot and Rasuwa regions.

Video shared by police showed catastrophic flooding, with entire buildings swept away in the powerful currents. Other footage shared shows a bridge and multiple buildings on the banks of the Trishuli River destroyed in the flooding. Officials have since confirmed that 32 bridges and nearly 40 km of road were swept away.

Police also issued a warning that they expect the flooding to continue down the Bhotekoshi River into the regions of Dhading and Muglin in the center of the country. 

The Prithvi Highway, one of Nepal's busiest roads that connects Kathmandu to the second-largest city, Pokhara, passes through these regions along the Trishuli River. Police confirmed Wednesday this section of the highway would be closed.

The flooding has also resulted in widespread casualties at the border between Nepal and China’s Tibet region. A mudslide occurred near the Gyirong checkpoint on the border, resulting in at least three deaths and more than 550 people missing in Gyirong County, according to Chinese state media.

Chinese President Xi Jinping ordered “all-out efforts” for search and rescue operations in response to the mudslide, as well as calling for the strengthening of “monitoring and early warning, ensure scientific rescue operations and guard against secondary disasters,” Chinese media reported.

Footage from the checkpoint shows water engulfing buildings as people flee the oncoming currents. TIME has been unable to independently verify the footage.

President Donald Trump has been engaged in an ongoing legal battle to attach his name to the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts—and a new court filing warns that the building could eventually face demolition if his renovation plans do not proceed.

In the filing, Justice Department lawyers representing the center argued that Trump’s proposed renovations were necessary to prevent what they called "a financial and structural death spiral." They described the building as ‘structurally unsound, fundamentally unsafe, and embarrassing to the Nation’s Capital’ and warned that without the work, it could deteriorate to the point that it would need to be demolished.

The filing suggested that the building could be replaced by a large outdoor amphitheater overlooking the Potomac River. The lawyers said that “such a replacement will fail to adequately honor President John F. Kennedy, but would be simpler and more economical to build, operate, and maintain.”

The filing marks an unusually explicit reference by the Trump Administration to the possibility of demolishing the venue, which first opened its doors in 1971 as a living memorial to President John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated in 1963.

How the fight over the Kennedy Center escalated to demolition threats

At the start of Trump’s second term, he overhauled the center’s governing board and replaced several members with allies. That board voted in December 2025 to rename the venue as the “Trump Kennedy Center.” In February, he also ordered the center to close for two years to make way for renovations.

In May, a judge ruled that only Congress could rename the center and temporarily blocked both the name change and the planned closure. The judge ordered Trump’s name removed from the building.

Earlier this month, the board voted to rename the building “The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts Restored and Renovated by President Donald J. Trump,” setting up a new test of the court’s ruling.

Internal records obtained byThe Washington Post showed that ticket revenue and fundraising fell sharply after Trump’s name was added to the building.

The reference to demolition comes as Trump has pursued major changes to other Washington landmarks. His Administration demolished the White House’s East Wing to make way for a ballroom costing hundreds of millions of dollars—a project facing its own legal challenges.

In a statement Tuesday, lawyers for Ohio Rep. Joyce Beatty, an ex officio member of the center’s board, called the Justice Department’s threat “unconscionable.” 

“This is a not-so-subtle threat to demolish the Kennedy Center if the President doesn’t get his way,” attorneys Norm Eisen and Nathaniel Zelinsky said. “This is unconscionable, it is unbecoming of the Department of Justice to even put this in a filing, and we will answer in court.”

A hearing is scheduled for 2 p.m. on Thursday, Aug. 27, on Beatty’s emergency motion seeking to block the board’s latest attempt to add Trump’s name to the center.

TIME has reached out to the Justice Department and the Kennedy Center for comment.

The U.S. Secret Service said it was aware of a video broadcast by Iranian state media that appeared to threaten President Donald Trump’s youngest son, Barron.

“The U.S. Secret Service is aware of the video and investigates anything that can be perceived as a threat toward our protectees,” Secret Service spokesperson Nate Herring said in a statement. “Out of concern for operational security, we do not discuss matters of protective intelligence.”

According to the U.K.-based news outlet Iran International, the nearly three-minute clip—which starts with a graphic that reads “Where to Kill Barron Trump”—describes efforts to reach the President’s 20-year-old son, whom the video narrator claims is under surveillance.

The video also references several locations related to Barron Trump, such as his place of study and the Trump Tower in New York, as well as his security arrangements. The narrator also suggests a $10 million reward connected to efforts against Barron Trump.

Read More: Trump's Secret Plane Swap Was Unusual, Not Unprecedented

TIME could not independently verify the claims made in the video, which provided no evidence that Barron Trump was actually under surveillance or that anyone had successfully compromised his security. The White House referred TIME to the Secret Service when asked for a response to the apparent threat against Barron Trump.

CNN first reported that the Secret Service was aware of the segment, which aired over the weekend on state-run Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting. IRIB operates under the Supreme Leader's control.

The segment follows a similar video released in July by the IRGC-affiliated Tasnim News Agency that focused on First Lady Melania Trump. That video depicted purported vulnerabilities in her security and ended with the words: ‘Barron Trump, wait for us!’”

Trump has been the subject of such threats from Iran since his first term. Iranian officials have repeatedly threatened Trump since he ordered the airstrike that killed Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, the commander of Iran’s elite Quds Force, in early 2020. 

Threats intensified after the U.S. and Israel launched strikes against Iran in late February, killing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei during the opening phase of the war. His son and successor, Mojtaba Khamenei, has vowed to avenge his death.

Images depicting the deaths of Trump and members of his family have since featured prominently in Iranian calls for revenge.

Last month, a mural in Tehran’s Palestine Square depicted members of the First Family above coffins draped in American flags. The same month, in Enqelab Square, the site of pro-Khamenei demonstrations, a billboard appeared to show Trump’s body in a coffin.

“I don’t think it’s any secret—it’s been in the media that Iran has publicly said they want to kill President Donald Trump,” U.S. Secret Service Deputy Director Matt Quinn told reporters at an event in July.

Earlier this month, the President confirmed that he had secretly switched planes as he left a NATO Summit in Türkiye in July based on a possible Iranian threat.

In response to the Iranian threats on his life, Trump has warned that any Iranian attempt to assassinate him would result in the ‘decimation’ and ‘destruction’ of Iran.

The Supreme Court has handed President Donald Trump a victory in his efforts to restrict mail-in voting ahead of November’s crucial midterm elections. 

In an unsigned 6-3 ruling, with the court’s liberal justices dissenting, the Supreme Court lifted a lower court’s June block on the President’s Executive Order targeting mail-in voting after 23 Democratic states and Washington D.C. sued the Administration for the order’s alleged unconstitutionality and presidential overreach.

Democrat lawmakers have responded furiously to Monday’s decision. “Another day, another Trump attempt to rig elections and destroy democracy,” said California Governor Gavin Newsom on social media. “We can stop this. Vote this November.”

Trump, in his push to remake American elections, has repeatedly blamed mail-in voting for widespread electoral fraud. He claimed that mail-in ballots helped him lose in the 2020 election despite audits already refuting those claims, and his own voting by mail in recent elections.

The ruling does not settle whether the Executive Order will proceed ahead of the November midterms, where the Republican Party needs to defend its narrow majority in Congress. Part of the order covering the U.S. Postal Service remains blocked under a separate injunction in August, which still needs to be resolved.

The Supreme Court also did not outright rule on the legality of Trump’s order—only on the timing of the challenges to it—and left it open to future lawsuits, which critics have signaled they will file.

Here’s how other Democrats, as well as some Republicans, have responded to the decision, and what it means for November’s pivotal midterms. 

Democrats vow legal challenges against “terrible” Supreme Court decision 

Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania said Monday that the legal battle against Trump’s Executive Order would continue, after a previous challenge put a temporary halt on the directive. 

“Not so fast. Today’s SCOTUS decision does not deal with the substance of Trump’s unconstitutional Executive Order and does not mean his illegal attempt to restrict mail-in voting will go forward,” argued Shapiro. “We’ll see the Trump Administration in court.”

Gov. Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey also vowed a response to the decision. “This is a terrible decision from Trump’s Supreme Court,” she said. “States run elections, not Donald Trump. I will do everything I can to protect New Jerseyans’ right to vote – by mail and in person.”

Newsom built upon his condemnation on Monday. “California will be suing again to block these Orwellian rules from being implemented,” he said. 

“This decision is a painful setback,” Attorney General Letitia James of New York, one of the plaintiff states from June’s challenge against the Order, said in a statement. “But it will not be the final word.”

More widely, other Democrat lawmakers criticized the Supreme Court’s decision and the impact it could have on the upcoming midterms. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said: “It’s a disgrace that the highest court in the nation is allowing Trump to put a dagger into the heart of our democracy,” following the decision. 

Schumer argued the Order was “blatantly unconstitutional,” and that “his MAGA Supreme Court is refusing to stop it from going forward.”

Hitting out at the President more broadly, the lawmaker continued: “[Trump] wants to make it harder for Americans to vote so they don’t hold him accountable for the skyrocketing costs, illegal war, and rampant corruption that are a hallmark of his administration.”

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada issued another direct response at the President himself. “Trump voted by mail eleven days ago. Apparently it’s good enough for him, but he wants to take away your right to vote in the same way,” she said. 

“Trump’s voter suppression order is about making it harder for Americans to hold him accountable - it is shameful that the Supreme Court is enabling it,” the lawmaker continued. 

Sen. Maria Cantwell also expressed concerns over the privacy of voters. “Today’s Supreme Court decision gets the Trump Administration one step closer to implementing its voter suppression order and forcing states to hand over personal voter data to the federal government,” she said. 

Republicans celebrate Supreme Court decision

“With today’s SCOTUS ruling, President Trump has made a giant leap forward in securing our 2026 elections,” said Utah Sen. Mike Lee, a long-standing supporter of Trump’s efforts to restrict mail-in voting. 

“Congress must still pass the SAVE America Act to secure future elections. We should’ve passed it months ago,” he continued in reference to the Act which is still awaiting approval in the Senate. 

Lee also responded to Gov. Shapiro’s commitment to continue legal challenges against the President’s Executive Order. “Why are you so determined to let non-citizens vote?” he said. 

“Bravo! Glad to see the Supreme Court get this one right. Election integrity is nonnegotiable,” said Rep. Keith Self of Texas, also pushing the Senate to approve the SAVE Act. 

“This is a major win for the security of American elections,” said White House spokesperson Lauren Bis in a statement to TIME. “These are commonsense measures that protect the security of mail-in ballots and ensure only Americans are electing American leaders.

What does the ruling mean for federal elections, and how did we get here?

On June 25, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston ordered an injunction on provisions of Trump’s March Executive Order. Those provisions direct the Department of Homeland Security and Social Security Administration to create “state citizenship lists” that cover eligible voters, and the Postal Service to create rules that would end sending absentee ballots to individuals not on a state’s mail-in or absentee participation list.

Talwani’s block covered the 23 plaintiff states and Washington, D.C. On July 25, the First Circuit rejected the Trump Administration’s request to block Talwani’s order pending appeal.

The Trump Administration sought the Supreme Court’s intervention in July, arguing that the lower court “lacked jurisdiction” to resolve the dispute, as implementing rules based on the President’s Order haven’t been finalized.

In the Monday ruling, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority agreed with the Trump Administration and paused Talwani’s injunction.

The top court said that Trump’s order regarding state citizenship lists was “an internal directive from the President to a subordinate” and that it “imposes no obligations on the States,” which in turn “suffer no concrete harm.”

It added that, in the case of Trump directing the Postal Service to propose rules on mail-in ballots, the legal challenge was premature and lacked standing. When states filed the suit, the Postal Service had not issued a final rule.

The Supreme Court’s majority said the district court had to engage in a “string of speculations” to arrive at its June injunction: “Federal courts review final rules, not proposed rules—and certainly not antecedent internal directives to propose a rule.”

What the ruling did not cover

While the Supreme Court’s majority paused Talwani’s June injunction for being premature, it does not cover a separate injunction—also from Talwani—on Aug. 11. Ruling on another suit, Talwani barred the Postal Service from implementing the same Executive Order for the November midterms nationwide.

The Supreme Court ruling also simply granted the Trump Administration’s emergency request to pause Talwani’s June injunction. The case on Trump’s Executive Order is still pending before the First Circuit.

It also explicitly left room for challenges on the legality of the rules stemming from Trump’s order, especially with the Postal Service’s final rule.

Norm Eisen, a voting-rights advocate leading one of several legal challenges to Trump’s order, downplayed the Supreme Court’s decision. “Please don’t overreact to Roberts Court decision on the contemplated [Postal Service] ballot moves,” Eisen posted on microblogging platform Bluesky Monday. “They simply held that the injunction came too early in the process, before there was a final rule.”

Volodymyr Zelensky may be under pressure to hold elections in Ukraine, including from his former defense minister Mykhailo Fedorov, but in remarks over the weekend, the Ukrainian President argued that doing so during the ongoing conflict with Russia would “destroy” the country.

“I believe that in a war like this, elections as such are a huge risk,” Zelensky said in remarks to journalists during a two-hour meeting Saturday—parts of which were made public on Sunday. “Elections right now are a tsunami for the country that will split Ukraine.”

Read More: Zelensky Faces Pressure to Hold Elections. What Stands in the Way?

The renewed push for wartime elections was bolstered by Fedorov, who, in a video posted to social media last week, argued that  "democracy cannot be held hostage by Russia.” Zelensky fired Fedorov, once his longtime ally, in July over disagreements in how to run the war with Russia.

“I believe that if we want to destroy the country, then during such a war we can move towards elections,” Zelensky said. 

Fedorov’s call for elections is the latest leadership test for Zelensky, whose five-year term expired in May 2024 but continues under wartime rules. Elections are suspended under martial law. 

Zelensky recently fired a top aide amid a growing corruption scandal involving members of his office. Zelensky himself has not been implicated, but it has added to his political woes.

For the first time with journalists, Zelensky addressed the ongoing controversy involving Fedorov on Saturday, claiming that the former defense minister’s actions were misguided. 

Zelensky added that “there can be no conflict at such a level between leaders,” referring to Fedorov's conflict with the former Armed Forces commander-in-chief Gen. Oleksandr Syrsky. Zelensky also replaced Syrsky last month after Fedorov’s removal spurred massive protests within the military and on the streets of Kyiv.

Syrsky was widely viewed as part of the old guard, while Fedorov had pushed for the adoption of modern warfare technology, including drones.

“I really had and still have a very positive attitude towards Mykhailo [Fedorov],” he said, according to local news outlet Interfax. “We’ve been through a lot together. But I think that he himself is going—or he's being pushed—into the wrong things.”

In a post on X, Zelensky also mentioned that the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense was under severe strain with a $27 billion shortfall. 

“At the beginning of the year, decisions were made at the Ministry to use in the first half of the year funds that were intended to be disbursed in the second half, and that money went toward drone production and other needs,” Zelensky posted. “Now, in the second half of the year, those funds need to be compensated for and supplemented.”

Zelensky discussed the defense budget deficit during a summit with Nordic and Baltic leaders in Kyiv on Sunday, where the leaders of Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Sweden agreed to continue to provide military and financial support. 

U.K. Prime Minister Andy Burnham is set to visit Ukraine Monday, in his first international visit. 

“Russia should be in no doubt of our resolve. We will not back down until there is a just and lasting peace,” Burnham said in a statement Monday.

Successive polls have shown a lack of public interest in holding elections during the war. The latest, conducted by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology from July 20 to Aug. 3, shows that 57% of Ukrainians believe elections should be held after fighting has ended, down from 69% in March. Experts have previously said that the invasion, which Russian President Vladimir Putin launched in 2022, nixed the possibility of holding safe and secure elections in Ukraine. 

Zelensky has denied postponing the polls to cling to power, and told reporters on Saturday that holding elections “is impossible under the conditions we have now, when Putin does not want to accept any ceasefire options.”

In the same conversation, Zelensky said he believes Russia will draft an additional 300,000 troops to fight in Ukraine after Russian parliamentary elections, which are scheduled on Sept. 18-20.

Zelensky said Russia could also draft more ​troops in 2027. He expects most of the additional forces to be deployed in the Donetsk region in eastern Ukraine, where military clashes are ongoing.