Across the country, students are short-circuiting their laptops at school in a new and sometimes dangerous social media trend. The “Chromebook challenge” involves students jamming objects into their laptops until they spark and smolder. Students then record the smoking laptops and share the footage on TikTok and Instagram, sometimes set to music, as viewers react with heart and thumbs-up emojis. It’s not just the expensive computers that get damaged: Floors and desks are scorched. Lessons are interrupted. Classrooms are evacuated. Fire and police departments are summoned. And some students have been suspended or even faced criminal charges, as schools work to stop the trend. Here’s what to know. How does it work? The “Chromebook challenge” involves using objects such as push pins, staples, paper clips, metallic gum wrappers and graphite, found in pencil lead. They are inserted into USB or charging ports, under keyboard keys, or near the batteries to deliberately short-circuit the devices. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Sometimes the batteries are smashed to facilitate the reaction. Students from elementary through high school have been reported doing it. “Unfortunately, we have seen instances of this dangerous behavior occurring in schools across our district,” Michael J. Testani, the superintendent of schools in Fairfield, Conn., said in a letter to families. Scott Loehr, the superintendent for the Center Joint Unified School District in Roseville, Calif., said that on May 7, a middle school student inserted a sharp metal object into his laptop’s keyboard, causing it to smoke. His teacher evacuated the classroom and doused the device with a fire extinguisher. “What we learned was the idea did come from TikTok or from this challenge,” Mr. Loehr said. Now, a search on TikTok for videos of the challenge brings up a safety message about online challenges that “can be dangerous.” TikTok said in a statement that it removes content that violates its policy on dangerous activities and challenges and is redirecting search terms and hashtags. Instagram did not reply to a request for comment.Students have been suspended and fined. School districts in Maine, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Arizona, Virginia, Colorado, Minnesota, California and Nevada and other states have sent letters to families, pleading with them to intervene. Some have suspended students and imposed fines of hundreds of dollars for damage to property and to the school-issued Chromebooks. Some districts are also calling the police or excluding offenders from technology privileges on school grounds. In the Boulder Valley School District, which has more than 28,000 students, the first sign that something was amiss came on May 2, when a column of white smoke spewed from a Chromebook during an advisory period in a band room at Centaurus High School in Lafayette, Colo. The device was moved into a hallway, where it melted the floor. Staff members thought it had malfunctioned, said Randy Barber, the district spokesman. Then, on May 5, smoke wafted from a laptop in Broomfield Heights Middle School. On May 6, a laptop at Angevine Middle School emitted smoke. Another middle school, an elementary school and a high school reported smoking laptops on May 6 and May 7. The first few cases were referred to the information technology department. When teachers reported smoking Chromebooks, Mr. Barber said, “I.T. staff put things together, after realizing that the computers had been tampered with and had similar damage.” He said he had been hearing similar accounts from colleagues in the National School Public Relations Association. “It is something happening nationally,” Mr. Barber said.A school evacuation and felony criminal charges. On May 8, Belleville High School in Belleville, N.J., was evacuated after a student caused their Chromebook to smolder, the police, quoted by News 12, said. The student was charged with third-degree arson and criminal mischief, the police said. A 13-year old girl was arrested in Long Beach, Calif., on May 8 in a classroom at Perry Lindsey Academy, according to the Long Beach Police Department. She was booked for felony arson of property, a police spokesman said. The Los Angeles Times reported that it was related to the Chromebook challenge. In Maine, Don Rous, the Waterville Junior High School principal, told parents in a letter on May 7 that they were not allowing students to remove Chromebooks from school grounds because of concerns some could attempt the prank at home.“If the spark was large enough, there is a chance that it could catch bedding, drapes, or furniture on fire,” he wrote. “That would put everyone in the home at risk.” In Arizona on May 8, students at Bullhead City Middle School were evacuated after a Chromebook laptop began oozing smoke in a classroom. Firefighters and the police were summoned. Six Chromebooks were also vandalized at Fox Creek Junior High School, though none caught fire, the Bullhead City School District said. No one was injured. An 11-year-old male student faces a juvenile referral for charges of aggravated criminal damage and interference or disturbing an educational institution, the Bullhead City Police Department said. The district superintendent, Dr. Carolyn Stewart, said in a statement to families that parents of children who damage school property might be financially liable. “This is yet another urgent call for parents and guardians to talk to their children about social media responsibility, and the inherent dangers, and consequences that come with poor decisions,” she said. “These are not innocent pranks.” A few online challenges have been fatal. In Virginia this month, an 18-year-old was fatally shot by a resident at a house where he and his friends rang the doorbell and ran, for a ding-dong-ditch challenge. Other dares include eating detergent pods and hot peppers. The Food and Drug Administration has warned about trends encouraging participants to consume large doses of Benadryl or to cook chicken in NyQuil. Some of the challenges are not widespread. Dan Davis, the spokesman for the Carson City School District in Nevada, said administrators knew about previous viral rampages, including slapping teachers and destroying school toilets and soap dispensers. So it braced for the possible appearance of the Chromebook challenge in its nine schools, warning families last week about it and saying there is a $300 fee to replace devices that are intentionally damaged. “We came out on the front end of things to dispel any challenges and to keep our parents and families apprised of the situation,” he said. Why are students doing this? “What makes teens do this?” Mr. Barber of the Colorado school district said. “I think I would say they are super curious. It is a little bit like wanting to do a science experiment.” “Beyond that,” he said, “I don’t know.”

President Donald Trump has issued a flurry of executive orders aimed at reshaping immigration policy, only to see many of them tied up or halted by federal judges. Now, he’s looking to the Supreme Court to break that pattern. On Thursday, the Justices will hear arguments in a high-stakes case that sits at the intersection of two fiercely contested areas of law: birthright citizenship and the power of federal courts to block presidential actions nationwide. While the case is ostensibly about Trump’s executive order ending automatic citizenship for the U.S.-born children of non-citizens, legal observers agree the real fight is over the judicial tool that has repeatedly thwarted Trump’s agenda: universal injunctions. Advertisement The Trump Administration is not directly asking the court to review the constitutionality of its citizenship order, but is rather urging the Court to curtail or eliminate the ability of lower courts to issue nationwide injunctions, which have frozen Trump’s policy in place while litigation unfolds. Trump’s lawyers argue that universal injunctions exceed the constitutional authority of individual judges and prevent the government from implementing policy while cases wind through the courts. Broader relief, they say, should come only through mechanisms like class-action lawsuits—not sweeping injunctions issued by single district judges. “These injunctions have reached epidemic proportions since the start of the Trump Administration,” the Justice Department wrote in a March filing, noting that more were issued in February 2025 alone than during the first three years of the Biden Administration. Trump’s executive order, issued on his first day back in office, would deny citizenship to babies born on American soil if both parents lack U.S. citizenship or lawful permanent residency—even if they are in the country legally on temporary visas. But legal experts say the order violates the doctrine of birthright citizenship guaranteed under the 14th Amendment and more than 120 years of court precedent set by the Supreme Court in the landmark 1898 ruling United States v. Wong Kim Ark. “This order is blatantly unconstitutional,” says Rachel Rosenbloom, a law professor at Northeastern University in Boston who is writing a book about the history of efforts to restrict constitutional birthright citizenship. “Many historians and legal scholars, and all of the district court judges who have looked at this order have said there's simply no way that this order is constitutional.”

President Donald Trump’s plan to accept a $400 million luxury aircraft from the Qatari government has ignited a full-blown firestorm among congressional Democrats, who are treating the proposal not just as a potential constitutional violation, but as a rallying cry they hope can break through with disaffected voters. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is leading the charge, announcing Tuesday that he would place a blanket hold on all Justice Department nominees awaiting Senate confirmation until the White House provides a full accounting of the deal and Attorney General Pam Bondi testifies before Congress. “This is not just naked corruption,” Schumer said on the Senate floor. “It’s the kind of thing that even Putin would give a double take.” Advertisement Schumer presented a list of questions and demands for the Trump Administration to respond to before he lifts his hold on nominees, focusing primarily on the national security implications of the President accepting a customized Boeing 747-8 jet for use as Air Force One, and then transferring the aircraft to his presidential library: "President Trump has told the American people this is 'a free jet.' Does that mean the Qataris are delivering a ready-on-day-one plane with all the security measures already built in? If so, who installed those security measures, and how do we know they were properly installed?" Schumer asked. For months, Democrats have been searching for a clear, galvanizing issue following their defeat in the 2024 election. More so than Trump's deportations or sweeping government cuts, many now believe this could be it. “He’s going to turn Air Force One into Bribe Force One,” Democratic Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts tells TIME. “Congress has to be involved with such a clear threat to our national security.” Those national security concerns appear to be partly rooted in questions about Qatar’s current and past allegiances. For years, the Qatari government sent millions of dollars a month into the Gaza Strip, which helped prop up the Hamas government. In 2017, Trump publicly accused Qatar of funding terrorism and backed a Saudi-led blockade of the country. Democrats are betting that voters, fatigued by Trump’s provocations but unsure what line he cannot cross, will see the jet deal as a glaring example of personal enrichment and compromised national interests. Last month, the Trump Organization finalized a deal to build a luxury golf resort in Qatar featuring Trump-branded villas and a course constructed by a Saudi firm—the first such foreign venture since Trump returned to office. Democratic Rep. Ritchie Torres of New York called the Qatari’s offer “the most valuable ever conferred on a president by a foreign government,” and described the arrangement as a “flying grift.” In a letter to federal ethics and oversight officials, Torres called for an immediate ethics review and policy reforms to prevent foreign gifts from being converted into private assets by current or former presidents. “In the cruelest irony,” Torres wrote, “Air Force One will have something in common with Hamas: paid for by Qatar.” Advertisement Rep. Jamie Raskin, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, led the prosecution of Trump’s second impeachment after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. He plans to introduce a resolution calling on Trump to come to Congress to request approval for accepting the $400 million aircraft, according to The New Republic. Raskin plans to cite Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, which says that no one in the federal government can take an emolument in office without the consent of Congress. Even some Republicans have expressed misgivings with Trump’s plan to accept the Qatari’s offer. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas warned of espionage risks, and Sen. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia said she’d be “checking for bugs.” Former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley flatly wrote on social media that “taking gifts from other countries is never a good practice.” But others insisted that the story was not resonating outside of Washington.

Temperatures soared dangerously high across south and central Texas on Wednesday amid what forecasters with the National Weather Service called “one of the hottest May heat waves of all time.” Multiple records are expected to fall as the heat lasts well into next week. By 5 p.m., Austin had reached 101 degrees, surpassing its same-day record of 97 set in 2022. Earlier forecasts had indicated the city might reach 105 degrees, breaking the 104 degree record for the hottest day in May. It’s common for Austin or anywhere in Texas to reach the 100s in the summer, but Orlando Bermúdez, a forecaster in the Weather Service’s Austin and San Antonio office, said on Wednesday that an average high there for this time of year is 87 degrees. “This is something we see in mid-June and definitely in July and August,” Mr. Bermudez said. “But this early in May? This is rare.” The heat wave began on Tuesday with many locations in the central and southern parts of the state breaking 100 degrees. On Wednesday, temperatures in those regions ranged from 100 to 111 — levels that are considered dangerous to anyone who can’t escape to an air-conditioned space and pour a cold glass of water. Most other areas of Texas are forecast to see temperatures in the 90s. Matthew Brady, a meteorologist with the Weather Service, said the risk for heat-related illness was high, because “many will not be acclimated to this type of heat so early within the year.” Little relief is expected at night, with overnight lows in many locations likely to dip only into the upper 70s, compared with the lows in the mid-60s that are typical for this time of year. While tying a single heat wave to climate change requires analysis, scientists have no doubt that heat waves around the world are becoming hotter, more frequent and longer lasting. Last year was Earth’s hottest year in recorded history; the 10 warmest years in the history of accurate record-keeping (which spans the past 175 years) have been the past 10. Energy use soared on Tuesday and even more so on Wednesday as Texans blasted air-conditioners. Texas’ electrical grid is under increased stress as new manufacturing plants and data centers for artificial intelligence and cryptocurrencies are opening in the state. By late Wednesday afternoon, the demand for energy reached over 78,000 megawatts, surpassing the previous May record of 77,000 megawatts from last year, according to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, the organization operating Texas’ grid. Doug Lewin, an energy consultant who writes a newsletter focused on the state’s electricity grid, said the reliance Texans have on their air-conditioners is “very different” at 100 versus 105 degrees. But he said he expected the grid to be prepared to meet the demand. The record-breaking heat was caused by a dome of high pressure that started to move into Texas on Tuesday and was directly over the state on Wednesday. The high pressure in the atmosphere acts like a lid, trapping hot air and pushing it toward the Earth’s surface. “When that air touches the ground, that heats the air just above the surface,” Mr. Bermúdez said. Relief from the scorching weather is not expected until late next week. Areas around Austin and San Antonio are expected to break daily records for the next several days, a run of hot weather that Mr. Brady called “definitely unusual” for this time of year. The hot weather comes after Texas saw normal-to-below-normal temperatures at the start of May as well as thunderstorms that brought damaging winds, heavy rain, large hail and tornadoes. The Weather Service called the recent shift to hot weather “one of the more dramatic temperature swings in recent memory.”

When Shari Leid was a teenager heading off to college, she proudly opted for a vanity plate on her Mazda 323 hatchback that was a shortened version of one of her most-deployed words: “whatever.” Now, decades later, she has a different view of how dismissive it is to shut down a conversation with such a casually snide remark. It is, she’s found, the single word that can break even the strongest bonds—one she’s had to teach herself to stifle in the interest of maintaining healthy relationships. Advertisement The problem with ‘whatever’ “Whatever” is a "fighting word,” says Leid, a friendship expert who’s the author of books including The 50/50 Friendship Flow—and it’s an immature one at that. “People stop and notice it,” she says. “It’s in-your-face, and there’s something that feels demeaning to it.” Brushing off a conversation with “whatever” immediately escalates the tension in the conversation, whether you’re talking to a friend, family member, or the customer-service worker who won’t accept your return. Not only is it passive-aggressive, but it demonstrates indifference or a lack of respect. Plus, it doesn’t leave any room for continued discourse. “‘Whatever’ is such an easy way out—it doesn't continue the conversation,” Leid points out. “It’s almost like you’re saying ‘shut up.’ Where do you go with that conversation?”

Ovarian cysts, which are small fluid-filled sacs that develop in or on the ovaries, are very common and are usually harmless. In fact, “the process of ovulation—maturing an egg and releasing it—basically makes at least a little cyst, which pops when the egg is released, and then these cysts resolve,” explains Dr. Mary Jane Minkin, an ob-gyn at Yale Medicine. These are often called “functional cysts,” and they usually go away on their own. Advertisement Other types of ovarian cysts include hemorrhagic cysts (which bleed and cause pain), dermoid cysts (which may contain skin cells and sebaceous glands), and endometriomas (which are filled with dark, thick blood and develop as a result of endometriosis). Ovarian cysts also can occur with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), but they don’t always. Here’s what to know about ovarian cysts. How ovarian cysts affect women Most ovarian cysts are the size of a grape or cherry and don’t cause symptoms. But cysts that grow quickly can cause pain in the pelvis near the hipbone and a feeling of persistent pressure. “This discomfort can be intermittent or constant and may feel sharp or dull,” says Dr. Kelli V. Burroughs, an ob-gyn at UT Health—University of Texas Medical School at Houston. By contrast, cysts that rupture or burst can cause intense pelvic pain and sometimes slight bleeding, says Minkin. “The pain will get better as the fluid gets absorbed by the lining of the abdominal cavity.”

For just the second time in its 95-year history, soccer’s most watched event and sought after trophy will be contested on American soil; the FIFA World Cup. Over the course of 39 days, the United States, Canada, and Mexico will host 45 other countries, all competing for the biggest prize in soccer. Anticipation is high, so much so that President Donald Trump is establishing a dedicated task force. “This important event, taking place during the momentous occasion of the 250th anniversary of our country, presents an opportunity to showcase the nation’s pride and hospitality, while promoting economic growth and tourism through sport,” said Trump via a White House notice published on March 7. “My Administration will support preparations through a coordinated government effort.” Where and when is the 2026 World Cup taking place? From June 11 to July 19 2026, an estimated 104 matches will be played across the U.S., Mexico, and Canada. There will be 16 host cities, 11 of which are in the U.S. Every match from the quarter-final stage and onwards will be played in the States, with the grand final set to be played at the MetLife stadium in New Jersey. Other U.S. host cities include Dallas, Kansas City, Houston, Atlanta, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Boston, Seattle, Miami, and Santa Clara in the Bay Area. How to watch the 2026 World Cup For U.S. viewers, the 2026 World Cup will be broadcast on Fox Sports, with Spanish-language coverage also available on Telemundo. It has yet to be confirmed if there will be alternative viewing options for 2026 World Cup matches. However, for the 2022 World Cup, those with subscriptions to streaming services such as Hulu + Live TV and YouTube TV could watch matches on those platforms. Fox Sports also provided full match replays on its free streaming service, Tubi. What teams will be at the 2026 World Cup? This edition of the World Cup will be the first to include 48 countries, an increase from 32 which have played at each tournament since 1998. As hosts, the United States, Canada, and Mexico have automatically qualified for the tournament. Other countries must compete in qualifiers against nations from the same continent, followed by some inter-continental play-offs for certain countries. Iran, Japan, New Zealand and reigning champions Argentina have all secured their place at the tournament. The full line-up will be finalized once qualifying finishes in March next year. How does the tournament work? As mentioned, this is the first time that 48 countries will be competing at the World Cup, so the format has slightly changed from previous editions. The tournament begins with a group stage, with teams divided into 12 groups of four. Teams will play every other nation in their group once, with the top two automatically going through. Out of the teams that finish 3rd in each group, the best eight teams based on their points total will also go through. Advertisement This leaves 32 teams in the competition, who go into the knockout stage of the tournament, all the way to the final on July 19. Who are the favourites to win the 2026 World Cup? The odds may well change over the next 12 months or so, but there are already some frontrunners to lift the trophy in New Jersey. Current champions Argentina, with their star man Lionel Messi, will be looking to retain their world champion status by winning back-to-back tournaments, something last accomplished by Brazil in 1962. Brazil themselves are also contenders for the 2026 World Cup, last winning the competition in 2002. Despite disappointment in recent tournaments, Brazil is still the most successful nation in World Cup history with five titles. Meanwhile, last year’s European Championship saw Spain beat England 2-1 in the final, with Spanish teenage superstar Lamine Yamal shining throughout the tournament. Both nations will back themselves in 2026 to reach similar heights. Advertisement France has a star-studded squad with strong depth and exciting young players. Real Madrid forward Kylian Mbappé will hope to lead the line for France, this time without a mask. And 2026 will likely prove to be the last opportunity for Cristiano Ronaldo to get his hands on the only major trophy that has eluded him. The Portuguese forward is considered one of soccer’s best ever, but he will be 41 by the time the World Cup kicks off next June. The U.S. men’s soccer team will also look to use home advantage to improve on their performance at the 2022 World Cup, in which they reached the first round of the knockout stage. What exactly is President Trump’s 2026 World Cup task force? The President has described next year’s World Cup as the “largest sporting event in history,” and as such has designated a specific task force for the tournament. This is not the first time that a President has organised a federal task force to help coordinate an international sporting event. Bill Clinton put together similar agencies for both the 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games and Salt Lake City’s 2002 Winter Olympics. The 2026 World Cup task force will support host cities with logistical efforts, as each location expects to receive 450,000 visitors and an influx of an estimated $480 million from tourism trade. During the first meeting of the task force on Tuesday, May 6, Trump said the team will ensure that “those traveling to America to watch the competition have a seamless experience during every part of their visit.” He also confirmed that Andrew Giuliani, the son of former New York Mayor Rudy, will lead the task force. Advertisement While taking questions from reporters, Trump was asked about the fact Russia is currently banned from competing in FIFA matches and tournaments, on account of its invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Trump admitted he had been previously unaware of this, but then went on to say that the tournament—and the prospect of rejoining it one day—could be “a good incentive" for Russia to end the war. Concerns about transport and visa matters The transport infrastructure has come under criticism ahead of the world’s biggest soccer event. A report published in February raised concerns about burdens on U.S. air travel and how the high influx of visitors will be managed. The U.S. is also expected to struggle, if not at least be at full capacity, with public transport demands. This brings into question the issue of fans travelling between cities to watch games during the World Cup tournament. Meanwhile, there are concerns regarding visa waiting times for fans expected to attend from certain countries. The wait times for a visa interview at the U.S. embassies in Colombia and Turkey are high, and could extend beyond the start date of the World Cup. Advertisement At the task force meeting, Vice President J.D. Vance addressed the expected arrival of foreign visitors who will be travelling to watch the World Cup. He said: “I know we'll have visitors, probably from close to 100 countries. We want them to come. We want them to celebrate. We want them to watch the game. But when the time is up, they'll have to go home.” What else is there to know? If you want to get a feel for tournament soccer a year early, the U.S. will be hosting the FIFA Club World Cup this summer. The 32-team tournament will feature clubs from across the globe, playing at 10 different venues across the country with the final also being played at the MetLife Stadium. Trump’s task force will also “assist in the planning, organization, and execution of the events” surrounding the 2025 tournament. Some of the world’s best players set to feature at next summer’s World Cup will play in the States this year including Argentina’s Messi, who is the captain of Inter Miami. And if you're holding out for a Super Bowl-style spectacle come the World Cup final on July 19, 2026, then you’re in luck. FIFA president Gianni Infantino announced that a half-time show will be performed during the final with Coldplay confirmed to lead the way by selecting the acts.

A coalition of doctors, lawmakers and advocates for people with autism has spent more than a decade trying to ban a medical device that is used to deliver painful electric jolts to people with severe neurodevelopmental disabilities. Last year, a federal ban on the devices finally seemed imminent. But the upheaval sweeping the federal government during the Trump administration’s early months could further delay a resolution, allowing continued use of the controversial devices. Wide-ranging cutbacks have been announced at federal health agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration, whose medical devices section had been working on the lengthy and convoluted process of implementing a ban. Regulators determined that the jolts, delivered through electrodes strapped to a patient’s arms and legs, caused long-term harm and should no longer be used. Clinicians and relatives of residents at a treatment facility outside Boston defend the use of the devices, calling them a last resort for some of the facility’s most extreme cases. The uncertainty over the devices’ fate has been compounded by President Trump’s chief health official, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has falsely linked autism with childhood vaccines. He recently called autism a preventable epidemic that destroys families and prevents people from living a full life, a characterization described as dehumanizing by many autistic people. Rates of diagnosis for autism — a neurodevelopmental disorder that can cause difficulties with social interaction and communication — have increased nearly fivefold among children since 2000, when officials first began collecting such data. A recent report attributed some of the increase to increased screening, as well as a broader definition of the condition. Because it encompasses a broad array of traits that can vary in how they affect a person’s life, autism is often described as occurring on a spectrum. Some autistic people live independently, with demanding jobs and active social lives. Others have trouble navigating some tasks and interactions, but can manage well with accommodations.A subset of autistic people, however, need extensive day-to-day support, often beyond what their families can financially or emotionally provide. And in rare cases, the struggle to communicate or process sensory input can lead to extreme verbal and physical reactions, such as head banging or striking others. In those cases, individuals may be sent to live in a residential treatment facility, like the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center in Canton, Mass. It is the only place in the country known to use electric shocks to manage residents and prevent potentially harmful outbursts. The devices were developed in the 1980s by the center’s controversial founder, Matthew Israel. At the time, it was common for society to segregate people with neurodevelopmental disabilities and to use restraints and punishments. Today, Dr. Israel’s shock devices are approved for use on 55 adults living at the center. Some have worn the equipment — which is often locked onto them in fanny packs — for decades. Some people started receiving shocks as children, though the device is now approved for use only on adults. Critics, including Jan Nisbet, founding director of the University of New Hampshire’s Institute on Disability, point out that the shock treatment is considered a corrective measure, not a cure. In other words, people could be wearing the equipment for the rest of their lives to deter any harmful behaviors. “If you want to decrease a behavior, you can punish them,” said Dr. Nisbet, who wrote a book on the Rotenberg Center. “But you’re going to have to keep punishing them.”Most of the center’s residents are unable to consent to wearing the devices, leaving the decision up to their relatives and a probate judge. But some former residents have spoken out against the devices, including Jennifer Msumba, 48.She testified to Massachusetts lawmakers in 2023 that the shock treatment left her with long-term trauma, including nightmares. “Every night, I wake up screaming,” she said.The strongest jolts, which can be applied via remote control by clinicians and center employees, come at 41 milliamperes. A shock of that strength is extremely painful, causing a brief loss of muscle control. An electric current of 50 milliamperes is potentially fatal, depending on the amount of time a person is exposed to it. It’s not clear what Mr. Kennedy thinks about the shock treatment, which is used both to stop violent behavior and to compel residents to follow instructions, and his office has not responded to requests for comment. But given his other views on autism, some advocates worry that an F.D.A. under his control will abandon efforts to implement a ban. “No one should look at ending the torture of disabled people as a partisan issue,” said Zoe Gross, who is autistic and an activist with the Autistic Self Advocacy Network. This is the second time that the F.D.A. has sought to ban the devices. A previous ban in 2020 was overturned by a federal court a year later, until Congress voted to clarify regulators’ authority. The debate has lingered despite near-blanket condemnation of the devices by civil rights groups, many medical research organizations and the United Nations. Usage persists in part because the Rotenberg Center spends at least a million dollars a year on lobbying, according to tax records. But there are also ardent opponents of a ban in medical and legal circles, who say that the shock devices are the only option for some patients. Among the most vocal opponents of a ban are relatives of people receiving the treatment. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Tracy Green is one of them. She says the device gave her back her “beautiful son,” Anthony Green, who is 24. He began displaying violent behavior as a teenager, she said, sometimes forcing Ms. Green to barricade him, or herself, in a bathroom to avoid being bruised or bitten during his outbursts. Mr. Green was admitted to Rotenberg after being kicked out of several treatment programs for injuring staff members, his mother said. Drugs either didn’t work or put him in a severe stupor. Now, his family can interact with him safely again, Ms. Green said. Last summer, he was able to visit a swimming pool for the first time in years. “The cruel thing,” she said, “is not giving him the treatment.”Christopher Hinton, 32, has been on the device since he was 8 years old. His mother, Cheryl Lloyd, said the shock treatment was the only way to stop Mr. Hinton, who is Black, from hurting himself or acting out in public, which she fears could get him killed by law enforcement. “If the device is removed from him, that’s the fear that I have,” she said. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT It’s unclear what most residents wearing the devices think of the treatment. Many, including Mr. Green and Mr. Hinton, do not speak, or they communicate using only single words and short phrases. The center would not permit The Times to interview anyone wearing the shock devices during a visit late last year. In 2022, however, investigators from the Association for Behavior Analysis International talked to four patients receiving shocks. Three said they didn’t want it, one of whom begged to be taken away, according to their report. Even though one patient wanted the treatment, the organization disavowed it, making the group one of the last of its kind to do so. The outcry has come alongside a larger shift in society’s understanding of neurodevelopmental disabilities. There has been a growing awareness that efforts to “correct” behavior considered undesirable may traumatize people. A movement led by autistic adults and clinicians argues instead for a greater understanding from society and more support for speech therapy and other treatments. Ms. Msumba, the former Rotenberg Center resident who wore the device, calls herself proof that alternatives can work. Her new treatment facility, she told lawmakers in 2023, has given her the time to understand and cope with her disorders, and has prescribed medications that had been denied to her at Rotenberg. As a result, she said, “I have a real life now.” Glenda Crookes, the Rotenberg Center’s chief executive, said that many things changed after Dr. Israel left in 2011 as part of a deal with state officials investigating an incident when the devices were misapplied. Changes have included an expansion of other forms of treatment, Ms. Crookes said. But the facility remains committed to Dr. Israel’s values, she added, including the shock devices. “Our priority was, and always has been, to make sure that the treatment continues.”

This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox. Donald Trump just did the economic equivalent of Control-Alt-Delete on his trade policy. No, he didn’t fully retreat but he backed down enough that he’s ceded almost all of his leverage. That does not mean he admitted the chaos he unfurled was an entirely unnecessary self-inflicted trauma—or that he fully understands his role in sending the global economy into a freefall for more than a month. Before jetting off to the Middle East, the President on Monday climbed down from a scorched-earth tariff tift and pulled import taxes on goods coming from China from an eye-popping 145% down to a less harsh 30%. In turn, China downgraded its retaliation to 10% from 125%, giving legions of U.S. businesses hope that they could weather a standoff between two global leaders famous for their unbending nature. The added costs will still squeeze Americans who rely on cheap goods from China for day-to-day life, while the world’s two largest economies try to find a way out of their spiraling tit-for-tat standoff that roiled markets, shook consumer confidence, and shrunk the retirement accounts of millions of Americans. Even with the latest turnaround, U.S. consumers may still see some empty shelves in the coming weeks as the supply chain falls off the cliff. And the average American family would still see a net hike of $2,300, according to a new Yale Budget Lab analysis released after Trump’s announcement. And, later Monday, White House aides said the shift was not on all China imports; low-dollar packages from online retailers like Shein and Temu would actually see their surcharges jump in June.Still, ever the salesman, Trump started a victory lap well past the starting line. "There's a big incentive for China to stop, and I take them at their word they're going to work on that, I think, very hard,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday. Trusting China has never been a good bet for U.S. policy. Taking Beijing “at their word” is for most Presidents code for being a sucker when it comes to promises of human rights, environmental safeguards, and global ambitions. Trump's stance runs completely counter to orthodoxy popularized by President Ronald Reagan: trust but verify. But U.S. investors for the moment are putting their trust in Trump’s ability to steer the economy out of a potential nosedive and toward a safe landing. Markets broadly surged as the Dow recouped its post-"Liberation Day" losses sparked by Trump’s slapdash score settling. Since April 2, investors have been in open revolt over the tumult. At its lowest point, the Dow was down 14% from the day Trump took office. Before the pause was announced after trade talks in Geneva, the Dow was still down 6% from Inauguration Day levels. By the time markets closed on Monday, the rebound was complete, with traders actually up from January thanks to the biggest day of gains since tariffs tanked confidence.Trump, who has long shown an obsession with the stock markets as much as his polls, surely is taking the response as a win. The President’s unique flavor of grievance prompts him to see the U.S. economy as a perpetual victim of economic bullies and the bearer of bad actors. His protectionist advisers have encouraged his suspicions. But he also seeks approval, and whether it’s from polls or Wall Street’s Big Board, he reacts. His decision to pull back so strongly from the tariff stance he took just a few weeks ago showed just how reactionary and transactional this President can be. Still, Trump’s retreat on tariffs with China is not complete. Ninety days is some breathing room for consumers and investors alike, but it’s not forever. China is painting the reversal as a victory on its side, likely nursing more resentment from Trump and his nationalistic pride. Trump’s defenders, meanwhile, are noting that the United States collected more than $7 billion on import taxes in April compared to a month earlier.Now comes the spin contest. During his first term in office, Trump often used Potemkin announcements to declare victory in the hopes no one would follow up on the tangibles. Just look at the Foxconn project in Wisconsin: Trump promised 13,000 jobs and $10 billion investment there in 2017 and hyped it pretty relentlessly but it never came to pass. It was the same on his now-punchlined Infrastructure Week, a repeal of Obamacare, and a raise in family incomes by $4,000. None of that happened, either. But here’s the thing with Trump and his followers: they often listen to the loudest voice in their ears, and it’s tough to credibly argue that anyone can project further than this President. That’s why this fallback on tariffs might be seen for a good chunk of this country as a victory despite evidence to the contrary. Facts—and 401(k) reports—may say one thing, but feelings have always shown more powerful than hard realities.

President Donald Trump’s plan to accept a luxury aircraft from Qatar for use as a temporary Air Force One has opened a new front in the long-running battle over ethics and foreign influence in his presidency, just as he prepares to embark on his first major international trip since returning to office. The prospective gift—a Boeing 747-8 valued at roughly $400 million and dubbed “a palace in the sky”—would be among the most extravagant ever offered to a U.S. president by a foreign government. Trump has said the plane would be used solely by the Department of Defense during the transition to a new fleet of presidential aircraft and would later be donated to his presidential library. But critics across the political spectrum, including some Republicans, say the arrangement raises serious legal and constitutional questions—especially given Trump’s private business ties in the region and the shadow of past emoluments controversies.I think it’s a great gesture from Qatar. I appreciate it very much,” Trump told reporters Monday. “I would never be one to turn down that kind of an offer. I mean, I could be a stupid person and say, ‘No, we don’t want a free, very expensive airplane.’” Yet legal experts say the matter is far from simple. The Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause bars federal officials—including the President—from accepting gifts, payments, or benefits from foreign states without the consent of Congress. Trump insists the gift would go to the government, not him personally, but watchdogs and former ethics officials note that the practical outcome may still confer benefits on him, particularly if the plane is later showcased at a Trump-controlled presidential library or associated with his public legacy. “The situation is no different than if the Qataris gave $400 million in cash to Trump and told him to keep it under his bed until 2029, when he could spend it freely,” said Robert Weissman, co-president of consumer advocacy organization Public Citizen. Even some Republican allies have voiced discomfort, including far-right activist Laura Loomer and typically friendly venues like Fox News: “Do you worry that if they give us something like this, they want something in return?” host Brian Kilmeade asked White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, who responded with: “Absolutely not, because they know President Trump, and they know he only works with the interests of the American public in mind.” Qatar, a tiny but wealthy Gulf nation with a checkered human rights record and a major U.S. air base, has long navigated a delicate balancing act between American interests and those of regional rivals. In 2017, Trump publicly accused Qatar of funding terrorism and backed a Saudi-led blockade of the country. But by the end of his term, the blockade had lifted and Trump’s stance had softened—a reversal that coincided with deepening business ties between his family’s company and Qatari and Gulf interests. Pam Bondi, the attorney general and former Trump campaign surrogate who reportedly signed off on the plane deal, previously lobbied on behalf of Qatar. Trump’s visit to Qatar on Wednesday, the first by a U.S. President since George W. Bush in 2003, is a significant moment for the Gulf state as it strengthens its geopolitical position in the region, says Elizabeth Dent, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “Qatar is in a far better position now than they were under Trump’s first administration when his visit to Saudi Arabia emboldened Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the UAE, and Egypt to initiate a blockade on Qatar for funding Islamist groups,” Dent tells TIME. Last month, the Trump Organization finalized a deal to build a luxury golf resort in Qatar featuring Trump-branded villas and a course constructed by a Saudi firm—the first such foreign venture since Trump returned to office.