Month: January 2026

The U.S. State Department announced Wednesday that it will temporarily stop processing immigrant visas for citizens of 75 countries as part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to tighten standards for who may permanently enter the United States. The announcement from the State Department was first reported by Fox News,

The suspension, set to begin Jan. 21, applies only to immigrant visas for people seeking to live permanently in the U.S. Officials said the pause will not affect non-immigrant visas, including those for tourists, students, temporary workers, or visitors attending major sporting events such as the World Cup. However, applicants from some countries may still face hurdles if other travel restrictions apply.

The countries affected by the immigrant visa suspension include: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, the Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia, Brazil, Burma, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Colombia, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Republic of the Congo, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, and Yemen.

According to the State Department, the move is tied to a review of how immigration officials determine whether an applicant is likely to rely on public assistance. Long-standing immigration law bars entry to individuals deemed likely to become a “public charge,” but the administration is working to formalize and broaden how that standard is applied.  A post on social media read: “The State Department will pause immigrant visa processing from 75 countries whose migrants take welfare from the American people at unacceptable rates. The freeze will remain active until the U.S. can ensure that new immigrants will not extract wealth from the American people.”

Officials said consular officers have been instructed to halt processing while procedures are reassessed. “The Trump administration is bringing an end to the abuse of America’s immigration system by those who would extract wealth from the American people,” the department said in a separate statement. “Immigrant visa processing from these 75 countries will be paused while the State Department reassess immigration processing procedures to prevent the entry of foreign nationals who would take welfare and public benefits.”

The action follows guidance issued in November by the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services that expanded how officers evaluate whether an applicant could become dependent on government aid. Under the proposal, officials would weigh factors such as age, health, finances, education, job skills, family situation, English proficiency, and any past or potential use of benefits, including Medicaid, SNAP, CHIP, and even some non-cash programs. The threshold for denying applications was also lowered.

Officials said the pause will remain in place until the government determines that new immigrant admissions from the affected countries meet the revised standards.

Editorial credit: Chad Lawhorn Photography / Shutterstock.com

Denmark and Greenland remain firmly opposed to President Trump’s push to bring Greenland under U.S. control, despite what Danish officials described as direct but respectful talks with senior members of the Trump administration at the White House.

Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen said Wednesday that discussions with Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other officials were “frank but also constructive,” though they failed to resolve what he called a “fundamental disagreement” over Greenland’s future. Rasmussen said the meeting was requested by Denmark in an effort to challenge Washington’s narrative and lower tensions.

Rasmussen told reporters:“There is clearly a disagreement. e agree that it makes sense to try to sit down on a high level to explore whether there are possibilities to accommodate the concerns of the president while we at the same time respect the red lines of the Kingdom of Denmark .. Whether that is doable, I don’t know,” but said he hoped the process could “take down the temperature.”

Greenland’s foreign minister, Vivian Motzfeldt, echoed that position, saying closer cooperation with Washington does not mean surrendering sovereignty. “It’s never been more important to strengthen ties with the United States, but that doesn’t mean that we want to be owned by the United States.”

President Trump has repeatedly said the mineral-rich Arctic island is critical to U.S. national security and has refused to rule out using force to acquire it, alarming European allies and raising fears of a deeper fracture within NATO. On Wednesday, Trump again tied Greenland to his planned missile defense initiative, writing on Truth Social: “The United States needs Greenland for the purpose of National Security. It is vital for the Golden Dome that we are building. NATO should be leading the way for us to get it. IF WE DON’T, RUSSIA OR CHINA WILL, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN! Militarily, without the vast power of the United States, much of which I built during my first term, and am now bringing to a new and even higher level, NATO would not be an effective force or deterrent – Not even close! They know that, and so do I. NATO becomes far more formidable and effective with Greenland in the hands of the UNITED STATES. Anything less than that is unacceptable.”

Ahead of the meeting, Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen made clear that they have no interest in joining the United States. “Greenland does not want to be owned by the USA. Greenland does not want to be governed by the USA. Greenland will not be part of the USA,” he said, adding, “If we have to choose between the USA and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark.” Asked about Nielsen’s remarks, Trump responded dismissively, saying, “I don’t know who he is. Don’t know anything about him, but that’s going to be a big problem for him.”

While no breakthrough was reached, the parties agreed to form a high-level working group that will meet in the coming weeks to explore whether cooperation on Arctic security can move forward without crossing Denmark’s red lines. Rasmussen stressed that any demand involving U.S. ownership or political control of Greenland is “totally unacceptable,” adding that Denmark and Greenland remain open to dialogue but resolute on sovereignty. “It is not easy to think innovatively about solutions when you wake up every morning to different threats,” Rasmussen said, underscoring just how far apart the two sides remain.

Editorial credit: ActionPix / Shutterstock.com

Emmy Award-winning actor and director Timothy Busfield appeared in court Wednesday after turning himself in to New Mexico authorities to face multiple felony charges involving alleged sexual abuse of minors. Prosecutors are seeking to keep the 68-year-old actor in custody as the case proceeds, citing both the current charges and a newly reported allegation against him from years earlier.

Busfield was arrested after Albuquerque police issued a warrant charging him with two counts of criminal sexual contact of a minor and one count of child abuse. The charges stem from accusations that he inappropriately touched two young boys on the set of the television series “The Cleaning Lady,” which was filmed in Albuquerque while Busfield was directing. The children’s mother reported the alleged abuse to Child Protective Services, saying it occurred between November 2022 and spring 2024.  The investigation began in November 2024 after a physician at the University of New Mexico Hospital contacted authorities. Investigators said the boys feared reporting the incidents because Busfield was in a position of authority on set. Busfield denied the allegations during a police interview, suggesting the children’s mother was retaliating after her sons were replaced on the show, a claim later echoed by his attorney.

On Wednesday, prosecutors filed a motion seeking to keep Busfield detained pending trial, arguing that his release would pose a risk to the community. Prosecutors also disclosed a new allegation reported to law enforcement the same day Busfield surrendered. According to court filings, the father of a then-16-year-old girl alleged that Busfield kissed and inappropriately touched his daughter during an audition at B Street Theatre in Sacramento, California, an organization Busfield co-founded. The alleged incident occurred several years ago, and no charges have been filed in that matter.

Busfield’s attorney, Larry Stein, has denied all allegations on behalf of his client, sharing in a statement: “Tim Busfield denies the allegations in the criminal complaint and maintains they are completely false. As a voluntary step, he submitted to an independent polygraph examination regarding those allegations and passed.” Busfield also share a video to the media outlet TMZ on Tuesday prior to turning himself in, where he labelled the accusations against him as ‘lies’ — a move prosecutors criticized as an attempt to control the public narrative.

During Wednesday’s court appearance, Busfield did not enter a plea and was ordered held without bond.  He remains in custody at the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Detention Center, with a detention hearing expected within five business days, when a judge will determine whether he will remain in custody.

Busfield, best known for roles in “The West Wing,” “Thirtysomething,” and the film “Field of Dreams,” is married to actor Melissa Gilbert. Through her publicist, Gilbert said she is not commenting publicly during the legal process. “Melissa stands with and supports her husband and will address the public at an appropriate time,” the statement said, warning that online claims attributed to her, including AI-generated content, are not authentic.

Editorial credit: DFree / Shutterstock.com

The Supreme Court on Tuesday appeared inclined to uphold laws in Idaho and West Virginia that prohibit transgender girls and women from competing on female school and college sports teams, signaling another potential setback for transgender rights nationwide. A final decision is expected later this year, and could determine how far states may go in regulating transgender participation in athletics across the country.

The bans at issue are part of a broader national trend, with at least 25 other states have enacting similar restrictions, meaning the court’s eventual ruling could have wide-reaching effects.

During more than three hours of oral arguments, the justices considered challenges brought by two transgender athletes — Becky Pepper-Jackson of West Virginia and Lindsay Hecox of Idaho — who argue that the bans violate the Constitution’s equal protection guarantee and Title IX, the federal law barring sex discrimination in education. Both athletes previously secured lower-court rulings allowing them to compete while litigation continued. Pepper-Jackson, now 15, competes in shot put and discus and previously ran cross-country. Hecox, 25, sought to compete in track and cross-country at Boise State University but did not make the teams; she later participated in club soccer and running. Hecox has since asked the court to dismiss her case as moot after deciding to stop playing sports covered by Idaho’s ban, citing fear of harassment, though state lawyers say the dispute remains live.

The court’s questioning suggested a majority was skeptical that the laws unlawfully discriminate. Several justices focused on Title IX’s Javits Amendment, adopted in 1974, which expressly permits sex-based distinctions in athletics. Conservative members of the court repeatedly emphasized biological differences between males and females and their relevance to competitive sports. Justice Brett Kavanaugh said “obviously, one of the great successes in America over the last 50 years has been the growth of women’s and girls’ sports. And it’s inspiring,” while adding that many institutions believe transgender participation could undermine those gains.

Idaho and West Virginia argue their statutes regulate sports based on biological sex, not gender identity, and are designed to preserve fairness and safety for female athletes. As Idaho officials wrote, “men are faster, stronger, bigger, more muscular, and have more explosive power than women;” with Idaho Solicitor General Alan Hurst telling the court, “if women don’t have their own competitions, they won’t be able to compete,” and said sex “correlates strongly with countless athletic advantages, like size, muscle mass, bone mass and heart and lung capacity.” West Virginia Solicitor General Michael Williams described the legal challenge as a “backdoor attack on Title IX,” warning that redefining eligibility around gender identity would reverse a law enacted to expand opportunities for girls.

The Trump administration has supported the states. Justice Department lawyer Hashim Mooppan argued that “Denying a special accommodation to trans-identifying individuals does not discriminate on the basis of sex or gender identity or deny equal protection,” even if transgender athletes use hormone treatments.

The cases arrive as the Supreme Court’s conservative majority has repeatedly ruled against transgender rights. Last year, it allowed states to ban gender-affirming care for minors and upheld Trump-era policies barring transgender people from the military and restricting passport sex designations. Those decisions contrast with a 2020 ruling extending workplace protections under Title VII to gender identity and sexual orientation — a precedent some questioned whether the court would apply to Title IX.

Editorial credit: Philip Yabut / Shutterstock.com

Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have declined to appear before the House Oversight Committee as part of its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, setting up a confrontation with the Republican-led panel that is now moving toward contempt of Congress proceedings.

The Clintons were subpoenaed in August 2025 to give closed-door depositions this week — Bill Clinton on Tuesday and Hillary Clinton on Wednesday. Instead, the couple released a joint, four-page public letter addressed to Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, calling the subpoenas “invalid and legally unenforceable” and accusing the committee of pursuing a politically motivated process.

Comer confirmed Tuesday morning that Bill Clinton did not appear for his scheduled deposition and said the committee would proceed with contempt action. “I think everyone knows by now, Bill Clinton did not show up,” Comer said, stressing that the subpoenas were approved unanimously in a bipartisan committee vote. He later added, “We will move next week in the House Oversight Committee markup to hold former President Clinton in contempt of Congress.” Comer said the panel would leave open the possibility that Hillary Clinton could still comply, though her attorney, David Kendall, has not indicated whether she plans to appear.

The letter from the Clintons states that “despite everything that needs to be done to help our country, you are on the cusp of bringing Congress to a halt to pursue a rarely used process literally designed to result in our imprisonment. This is not the way out of America’s ills, and we will forcefully defend ourselves.”  The Clintons argued they have already provided all relevant information in writing and accuse Comer of undermining the investigation’s stated purpose. “We have tried to give you the little information that we have,” they wrote. “We’ve done so because Mr. Epstein’s crimes were horrific. If the Government didn’t do all it could to investigate and prosecute these crimes, for whatever reason, that should be the focus of your work — to learn why and to prevent that from happening ever again. There is no evidence that you are doing so.”  They also contend the chairman has “done nothing” to compel the Justice Department to meet its disclosure requirements under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, passed late last year, while instead focusing on compelling testimony from individuals with limited knowledge.

Republicans on the House Oversight Committee say they want to question Bill Clinton about his past association with Epstein, including travel on Epstein’s private plane in the early 2000s and Epstein’s visits to the White House during Clinton’s presidency. Comer has acknowledged that neither Bill nor Hillary Clinton has been accused of wrongdoing, but has warned that failure to comply could result in criminal contempt referrals to the Department of Justice. If approved by the full House, such a referral would leave it to federal prosecutors to decide whether to pursue charges, which can carry penalties of up to a year in prison and a $100,000 fine.

The Clintons’ attorneys note that Hillary Clinton “has no personal knowledge of Epstein or Maxwell’s criminal activities, never flew on his aircraft, never visited his island, and cannot recall ever speaking to Epstein,” and that Bill Clinton ended contact with Epstein more than two decades ago and has expressed regret over even that limited association. Comer has rejected those arguments, saying it is up to the committee — not witnesses — to assess the value of testimony. “[T]he Committee believes that it should be provided in a deposition setting, where the Committee can best assess its breadth and value,” he said.

Editorial credit: Joseph Sohm / Shutterstock.com