It didn't take long for the Oval Office meeting Monday between President Donald Trump and El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele to turn ominous. In his opening remarks, the El Salvadoran strongman offered to assist the U.S. with what he said were its crime problems. “We know you have a crime problem and a terrorism problem we can help with,” Bukele said. By the end of the ad hoc press conference 40 minutes later, Trump and his aides had taken him up on the offer by suggesting their own harsh and potentially illegal moves. First, Trump’s aides made clear they wouldn’t comply with a Supreme Court order to “facilitate” the release of a Maryland man, Kilmar Abrego García, whom the administration has admitted was mistakenly deported to El Salvador in March and locked up in that country’s Terrorist Confinement Center, known as CECOT. Then Trump proposed sending U.S. citizens convicted of crimes to El Salvador, where prisoners are allegedly held incommunicado and face physical and mental abuse. It was a striking example of Trump’s approach to his second term in office: when faced with challenges to his authority, even over basic civil liberties, he has reached for even more power. Asked by a reporter whether he was open to deporting U.S. citizens to El Salvador, Trump said, “You think there’s a special category of person? They’re as bad as anybody that comes in. We have bad ones too. I’m all for it.” Observers went into the press conference expecting the two leaders to discuss the Abrego García case. After the Trump administration admitted to mistakenly deporting the Maryland man, a district court had instructed officials on April 4 to “facilitate and effectuate” his release from CECOT and return him to the U.S. The Supreme Court noted on April 10 that the Trump administration had admitted to violating “a withholding order forbidding his removal to El Salvador” and unanimously ordered the government to “facilitate” his release. The Court acknowledged the President's powers to conduct foreign affairs and instructed the district court to clarify its order that the Trump administration must “effectuate” Abrego García’s return to the U.S. Asked whether the administration was going to comply with the court’s order, Trump asked his Attorney General Pam Bondi to respond. “First and foremost, he was illegally in our country,” Bondi said. She said that in 2019 an immigration court and a board of appeals had both ruled that he was a member of the criminal gang MS-13, which Trump has declared a terrorist organization. “That’s up to El Salvador if they want to return him. That’s not up to us,” she said, adding that if they did, the U.S. would provide a plane. When a reporter asked Bukele whether he would send Abrego García back to the U.S., he said, “Of course I’m not going to do it.” Trump was then asked whether he would consider sending U.S. citizens to be imprisoned in El Salvador if they committed violent crimes. Trump welcomed the idea and said that Bondi, who sat on one of the Oval Office couches near him, is “studying” the laws. “If we can do that, that’s good,” Trump said. “I’m talking about violent people.” El Salvador's prisons have been called out by Human Rights Watch for "cases of torture, ill-treatment, incommunicado detention, severe violations of due process and inhumane conditions, such as lack of access to adequate healthcare and food." Sending U.S. citizens there could cross the 8th Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment and violate restrictions against imprisoning people more than 500 miles from home that Trump signed into law in 2018 as part of the First Step Act. Bukele relishes being called the “coolest dictator” and has brushed aside civil rights in El Salvador as part of his crackdown on gang violence. Abrego García had been living in Maryland with his wife and three children—all U.S. citizens. In 2019, immigration officials said he was a member of MS-13 and began removal proceedings. One immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals agreed, but those decisions were overridden when another immigration judge determined that Abrego García and his family had shown the gang in El Salvador threatened and harassed his family. Abrego García was arrested in March and mistakenly added to one of the flights, the Trump administration has said. In the April 4 ruling, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate” Abrego García’s release from prison in El Salvador to ensure his deportation case is handled correctly and instructed officials to report on what actions were being taken. She called into question whether Abrego García had a gang affiliation at all, writing that the evidence the government produced “consisted of nothing more” than a Chicago Bulls hat and hoodie and a “vague, uncorroborated allegation” from a confidential informant that Abrego García belonged to an MS-13 clique in New York, “a place he has never lived.” Abrego García’s case raises questions about whether the Trump administration has erroneously accused some people held in El Salvador of being gang members and then refused to correct their mistake. “As Americans, we should all be concerned by reports that 75 percent of the migrants the Trump Administration has sent to CECOT have no criminal record,” said Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Since Trump came to office on Jan. 20, his administration has flown more than 200 people from the U.S. to El Salvador to be imprisoned in CECOT.

President Donald Trump remains in “excellent health” and is “fully fit” to be Commander-in-Chief, his physician said in a report released by the White House on Sunday, April 13. Trump attended a medical appointment at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center on Friday—the first physical of his second presidential term. Trump consented to Dr. Sean Barbabella, the President's White House physician, releasing the results of his cognitive test and physical examination and tests. Per the report, Trump’s height and weight are 75 inches and 224 pounds, respectively. Scans of several body systems—including the eyes, ears, neck, throat, and heart—came back normal. The physician noted scarring on Trump’s right ear, obtained during the first assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, in July, 2024. Dr. Barbabella also shared that the President had undergone a colonoscopy in the summer of 2024, during which it was revealed that he had a benign polyp and diverticulitis, which is inflammation in the pockets of the colon. A follow-up colonoscopy was recommended in three years time. Trump's medical history also includes a past COVID-19 infection. Trump’s medications include prescriptions for cholesterol, a cardiac prevention medicine, and a cream to use as needed for “a skin condition.” The physician also notes that Trump, at some point, had bilateral cataract surgery. Overall, Barbabella—a decorated Navy physician—says that Trump is in “robust cardiac, pulmonary, neurological, and general physical function,” sharing that his “active lifestyle” including both golf and the general activeness required of his station helps his well-being “President Trump exhibits excellent cognitive and physical health and is fully fit to execute the duties of the Commander-in-Chief and Health of State,” Barbabella concludes. The report also said that Trump scored 30 out of 30 on a Montreal Cognitive Assessment exam. Trump’s health and cognitive acuity had been central to calls for him to release his medical records. Trump—who, at 78, is the oldest President to start a second term at the White House—notably faced many calls during his presidential campaign to release his medical records, especially after his then-opponent, former Vice President Kamala Harris, released her own in October 2024. “The American people deserve to have confidence in their elected officials’ mental and physical capacity to do the jobs they’ve elected them to do,” an open letter from over 200 doctors and health care providers in October read. “Trump ought to be going above and beyond to provide transparency on his physical health and mental acuity, given his advancing age.” The results of this physical are the first full, robust report we’ve had on Trump’s health since the results from his 2018 physical were released. However, Trump has released a number of brief medical updates over the years, including a signed letter by his former physician Dr. Ronny Jackson—a Republican Representative from Texas—after the July 2024 assassination attempt, and an incredibly brief medical letter that featured in a Nov. 20, 2023, Truth Social post.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, an Independent serving Vermont, made an unexpected appearance at the Coachella music festival in Indio, Calif., on Saturday evening. He offered a stark warning about President Donald Trump during a rousing on-stage speech. Sanders’ surprise address included calls for the younger generation to “stand up” against the fossil fuel industry, insurance companies, and U.S. states that are looking to roll back abortion rights. Upon his first mention of the "President of the United States," the crowd started to boo—a reaction which prompted Sanders to say: “I agree.” ExploreClose Subscribe Apr 13, 2025 7:35 PM IST Sen. Bernie Sanders Issues Stark Warning About Trump During Surprise Coachella Appearance Politics Donald Trump Rebecca Schneid by Rebecca Schneid Reporter 2025 Coachella Valley Music And Arts Festival - Weekend 1 - Day 2 Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks onstage before Clairo's performance at the Coachella Valley Music And Arts Festival on April 12, 2025, in Indio, Calif.Katie Flores/Billboard—Getty Images Sen. Bernie Sanders, an Independent serving Vermont, made an unexpected appearance at the Coachella music festival in Indio, Calif., on Saturday evening. He offered a stark warning about President Donald Trump during a rousing on-stage speech. Sanders’ surprise address included calls for the younger generation to “stand up” against the fossil fuel industry, insurance companies, and U.S. states that are looking to roll back abortion rights. Upon his first mention of the "President of the United States," the crowd started to boo—a reaction which prompted Sanders to say: “I agree.” Advertisement 00:02 03:00 Read More “[Trump] thinks that climate change is a hoax. He’s dangerously wrong,” Sanders warned. “And you and I are going to have to stand up to the fossil fuel industry and tell them to stop destroying this planet.” The Trump Administration has taken multiple actions that threaten to dismantle climate mitigation efforts since January—from the rollback of protections at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and an Executive Order to increase logging, to mass staff cuts at prominent agencies including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). “This country faces some very difficult challenges, and the future of what happens to America is dependent upon your generation,” Sanders opened his speech saying, appealing to the younger members of the crowd. “Now you can turn away and ignore what goes on, but if you do that, you do so at your own peril. We need you to stand up and fight for justice, to fight for economic justice, social justice, and racial justice.” Sanders went on to ask that the crowd “stand up and fight for women’s rights,” and work for economic justice and equality. “We have an economy today that is working very well for the billionaire class, but not for working families,” Sanders said. Ending on healthcare, he called for the audience “to stand up to the insurance companies and the drug companies and understand that healthcare is a human right.” Despite earning much applause of his own, Sanders was on stage to introduce singer-songwriter Clairo—born Claire Cottrill—who he praised on account of her own activism. “I’m here because Clairo has used her prominence to fight for women’s rights, to try to end the terrible, brutal war in Gaza, where thousands of women and children are being killed,” Sanders said. Earlier in the day, Sanders spoke with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democrat serving New York, in Los Angeles as a part of their “Fighting Oligarchy Tour.” Their rally drew thousands of attendees, and featured appearances from musicians Maggie Rogers, Neil Young, and Joan Baez. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have been touring the nation in hopes to “take on the Oligarchs and corporate interests who have so much power and influence in this country,” and address the growing influence of billionaires on the U.S. government.

President Trump threatened Harvard University’s tax-exempt status on Tuesday after the school rebuffed his administration’s demands for a series of policy changes, a dramatic escalation in the feud between the president and the nation’s richest and oldest university. The threat came a day after the Trump administration halted more than $2 billion in federal funding for Harvard because the university rejected changes to its hiring and admissions practices and curriculum. Mr. Trump decided to ratchet up his pressure campaign after watching news coverage of Harvard’s resistance on Monday night, according to a person with knowledge of the president’s deliberations, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations. “Perhaps Harvard should lose its Tax Exempt Status and be Taxed as a Political Entity if it keeps pushing political, ideological, and terrorist inspired/supporting ‘Sickness?’” Mr. Trump posted on Truth Social on Tuesday morning. “Remember, Tax Exempt Status is totally contingent on acting in the PUBLIC INTEREST!” White House officials said Tuesday that the Internal Revenue Service would make its decision about Harvard’s tax-exempt status independently, but the president has made clear in private that he has no intention of backing down from the fight with the university. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Losing its tax-exempt status could over time cost Harvard billions of dollars. It’s the latest turn in a battle between Mr. Trump and academia more broadly, in which the Trump administration threatened to withhold billions in federal funding from various colleges and universities, ostensibly as a way to purge “woke” ideology from America’s college campuses. Trump officials have suggested that schools like Harvard have been hotbeds of antisemitism, elitism and suppression of free speech. Federal law prohibits the president from “directly or indirectly” telling the I.R.S. to conduct specific tax investigations, and it is unclear whether the agency would actually move forward with an investigation. A spokeswoman for the I.R.S. declined to comment.“Selective persecution of your political adversaries through the tax system is the stuff of dictatorship,” said Lawrence Summers, the former Treasury secretary and former president of Harvard. “This is unconscionable and wrong but a continuation of trends we have seen in President Trump’s approach both to universities and to tax enforcement.” Officials at Harvard did not respond to a request for comment. Organizations have to apply to become tax-exempt. The I.R.S. will conduct audits and in some cases revoke an organization’s tax-exempt status if, for example, the I.R.S. finds that the group is engaging in too much political or commercial activity. Entities can appeal such a decision in court or enter into a settlement to try to preserve their status, former I.R.S. officials said. John Koskinen, a former I.R.S. commissioner, said that it was unlikely that the I.R.S. could successfully revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status, given its array of research and teaching functions. Still, having to litigate the question in court could be its own form of intimidation for Harvard. Editors’ Picks His Life Savings Were Mailed to Him by Paper Check. Now, It’s Gone. Timothée Chalamet Is Living a Knicks Fan’s Dream It’s Time to Put Away Your Winter Clothes. Here’s How to Store Them Safely. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT “The chances of getting the I.R.S. to actually revoke the 501(c)(3) status of a major university is almost nonexistent,” Mr. Koskinen said, referring to a tax-exempt category of organizations. “The problem is you’re causing people to spend a lot of time and money responding and defending their actions.” Because of its exempt status, Harvard for the most part does not have to pay taxes, though Mr. Trump’s 2017 tax bill instituted a tax on large university endowments that Republicans now want to substantially increase. Moreover, donations to the research university are tax deductible. That helps draw gigantic donations from ultrawealthy donors who want to choose how to spend their earnings rather than give their money to the federal government. Some prominent Republican donors, like the billionaires John Paulson and Ken Griffin, have given hundreds of millions of dollars to Harvard. Tax-exempt organizations have long been a political minefield for the I.R.S. During the Obama administration, Republican lawmakers accused the agency of unfairly targeting conservative political groups seeking tax-exempt status, though a watchdog later concluded that the agency had improperly scrutinized both conservative and liberal organizations. “Economists have extensively studied and documented that tax deductible charitable contributions have a massive effect on support for universities,” Mr. Summers said. “Removal of Harvard’s 501(c)(3) status, which won’t happen because we are a nation of laws, would, if it did happen, devastate progress in medical and scientific research, maintenance of American and Western values, opportunity for the next generation of Americans and an important magnet for the United States in the world.” Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT The Trump administration has repeatedly tried to turn the I.R.S. into a political tool, upending longstanding protections of sensitive taxpayer information by pushing the I.R.S. to help Immigration and Customs Enforcement deport undocumented immigrants. Administration officials have also dramatically cut the I.R.S. work force and moved to install Billy Long, a former Republican congressman with little background in tax, beyond promoting a fraud-ridden tax credit, to lead the historically apolitical agency. Nonprofit groups aligned with Democrats and liberal causes are bracing for the I.R.S. to scrutinize their tax-exempt status under the Trump administration. Last week, Trump officials sent Harvard a letter demanding changes at the university and routine progress reports on how they were being put in place, in order to continue to “maintain” the financial relationship with the government. Harvard rejected the demand. “No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue,” Alan Garber, Harvard’s president, said in a statement to the university on Monday. The Trump administration responded by instituting a funding freeze of more than $2 billion, though details of the funds were unclear. Harvard receives some $9 billion in federal funding, with $7 billion going to the university’s 11 affiliated hospitals in Boston and Cambridge, Mass., including Boston Children’s Hospital and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. The remaining $2 billion goes to research grants directly for Harvard, including for space exploration, diabetes, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and tuberculosis. Harvard is uniquely positioned to withstand the funding loss, with an endowment of more than $50 billion. By contrast, Columbia University, which has a far smaller endowment, settled with the Trump administration when it was pressed to make changes to its policies and programs. Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, deferred questions about Harvard’s tax-exempt status to the I.R.S. “All the president is asking: Don’t break federal law, and then you can have your federal funding,” Ms. Leavitt told reporters on Tuesday. “I think the president is also begging a good question. More than $2 billion out the door to Harvard when they have a more than $50 billion endowment: Why are the American taxpayers subsidizing a university that has billions of dollars in the bank already? And we certainly should not be funding a place where such grave antisemitism exists.”

The showdown between the Trump administration and institutions of higher learning intensified on Tuesday, when President Trump threatened Harvard University’s tax-exempt status after the school refused to accept his administration’s demands on hiring, admissions and curriculum. His threat, and the stakes involved, highlighted not only the billions of dollars in government funding that colleges receive every year but how that practice started and what all that money goes toward. When did colleges and universities begin receiving substantial federal funds? Around the time of World War II, the U.S. government started funding universities for the purpose of aiding the war effort, funneling money toward medical research, innovation and financial aid for students. The relationship between the federal government and higher education soon became symbiotic. As the government counted on universities to produce educated and employable students, as well as breakthrough scientific research, universities came to rely on continued funding. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT In 1970, the government dispersed about $3.4 billion to higher education. Today, individual colleges depend on what could be billions of dollars, which mainly go toward financial aid and research. Harvard alone receives about $9 billion in federal funds, with $7 billion going to the university’s 11 affiliated hospitals in Boston and Cambridge, Mass. The remaining $2 billion goes to research grants directly for Harvard. What does the government money pay for? The funding freezes have caused work stoppages, cut contracts, imperiled medical research and left students in limbo. Reductions can also affect hospitals that are affiliated with universities, like the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Boston Children’s Hospital, both of which are affiliated with Harvard. Universities have stressed that losing federal funding would jeopardize dozens of medical and scientific studies, including those on cancer and diabetes. After the Trump administration froze $1 billion for Cornell, the university said that affected grants included “research into new materials for jet engines, propulsion systems, large-scale information networks, robotics, superconductors, and space and satellite communications, as well as cancer research.” When Mr. Trump pulled $790 million from Northwestern, the university said that the freeze would hinder its research on robotics, nanotechnology, foreign military training and Parkinson’s disease.The University of Pennsylvania, which had $175 million in federal funding suspended, said that faculty across seven different schools were affected. Their contracts, according to a statement by Penn’s president, included research on preventing hospital-acquired infections, drug screening against deadly viruses and protections against chemical warfare. Don’t universities have their own funds? Yes and no. Most universities are funded by tuition and fees, private donations including endowments, research grants, and state and federal funding. But much of that money comes with guardrails. Harvard had an endowment fund of $53.2 billion in 2024, far more than any American university. But that endowment fund does not serve as an A.T.M. for the school. Many funds have specific restrictions that dictate how and when the money can be used. At Harvard, for example, 70 percent of the annual distribution of the endowment is allocated to specific programs or departments by donors. There can also be legal restrictions on the funds, as well as rules on how much can be used for discretionary spending. What happens now? Harvard became the first university to refuse to comply with Mr. Trump’s demands, citing their severe restrictions, including those on freedom of expression. In response, federal officials responded by freezing more than $2 billion in existing grants. But Harvard’s rejection of Mr. Trump’s demands could mark an inflection point in his attack on U.S. academia. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT “If Harvard had not taken this stand,” Ted Mitchell, the president of the American Council of Education, told The New York Times, “it would have been nearly impossible for other institutions to do so.” University administrators nationwide, having watched Columbia concede to Mr. Trump to avoid losing $400 million in federal funding, will now wait to see how Harvard and its president, Alan M. Garber, proceed in their fight against the Trump administration. It’s unclear what actions the Trump administration may take next, though possibilities include investigating Harvard’s nonprofit status and canceling more visas of international students.

In the beach towns west of Tampa, Fla., the message was clear for any spring breaker passing through. It appeared on chalkboard signs, waving inflatables and posters: We are open. Spring break season is fraught in some parts of Florida, where the raucous behavior of certain visitors can outweigh their economic benefit. Miami Beach has been on a yearslong campaign to deter the college crowd, including with an ad this year for a fake reality show in which partyers break the rules and suffer consequences. But for the businesses and the restaurants along the Gulf of Mexico that were ravaged by Hurricanes Helene and Milton last year, welcoming spring breakers — and anyone else, really — has been imperative. Some are still in temporary setups, or barely weeks into reopening, so every dollar is crucial. Many had anxiously anticipated the season, which began in early March and will wrap up in the next week or so, as a barometer for post-hurricane success. There are other pressures on Florida’s retail and tourism industries: Inflation and the threat of punitive tariffs have rattled the American economy. But in the Tampa-St. Petersburg region, few can remember a hurricane season as disruptive as last year’s, when Hurricanes Helene and Milton delivered a one-two punch just 13 days apart. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Some businesses and hotels remain closed, and local governments have been swamped with post-storm requests for building permits; many have expedited the process by waiving fees or setting up temporary remote sites to process claims. More than 8,000 emergency rebuilding permits have been issued in St. Petersburg alone, for an estimated $150 million in construction value. Hurricane Helene, in particular, “was a very humbling experience,” said Savannah Huskie, 28, a manager at the Bronze Lady, a boutique along the John’s Pass Boardwalk in Madeira Beach that flooded. The store had to close for two months and between the damage, the wrecked merchandise and the closure, lost hundreds of thousands of dollars. The ocean is both the greatest draw and the worst threat along the Gulf Coast. But hurricane season does not begin until June, making spring visits more appealing for many out-of-town visitors. “Spring break is our season, more than summer,” said Charlotte Hunter, the co-owner of Wild Time Caribbean, a store along the boardwalk in Madeira Beach that sells beach apparel and a menagerie of stuffed manatees and turtles. The store had to cancel merchandise orders in the immediate aftermath of the hurricanes, when there was still sand and debris piled in the roads and along the streets. “That’s why spring was so important for us — to recoup some of that,” said Ms. Hunter’s husband, Jim Hunter. The slow trickle at the start of the season gave them pause, and their door count was down by about 1,500 people for the second half of March. But it was unclear, the couple said, whether that was also influenced by inflation and a shaky economic outlook. Signs of recovery were everywhere. The city of Treasure Island held a new festival, “Back to the Beach: Sand & Kites & Coastal Delights,” last month after canceling several events over the fall and the winter. Storm debris was largely cleared away so that visitors and locals alike could safely walk along the streets and shorelines. Permits were approved so that businesses could legally operate outside of their damaged buildings, allowing them to reopen while they wrestled with bureaucratic paperwork. Still, there had been a lot of anxiety about whether anyone would show up. “There was a lot of question marks,” said Stephen Santasieri, the general manager at Caddy’s, a popular beach-front restaurant and bar in Treasure Island. Its building was flooded during Hurricane Helene, and snarled pipes and frayed wood were still exposed . Mr. Santasieri estimated that it would take at least a year to rebuild. Caddy’s spent three weeks of spring break serving $8 Patron cocktails and $10 margaritas (with a free gift) from a makeshift outdoor setup. Its kitchen is operating out of a food truck, without its usual fresh grouper and oysters. Rather than scribble their names on a strip of wood along the restaurant’s bar, a tradition at Caddy’s before the storm, customers have instead signed a banner hanging nearby. “People have really appreciated it,” Mr. Santasieri said. “They’re just happy to see it back.” In recent weeks, pink and purple bougainvillea bloomed near storm-battered sea grape bushes and palm trees. Beachgoers with rosy shoulders carried bags of snacks past construction workers repairing roofs. Some visitors came only after calling their hotels or their favorite haunts for assurance that they were open. Others had forgotten that the storms had even passed through. “I wasn’t even thinking about it,” said Lubomira Paskaleva, a teacher visiting from Kansas City, as she walked along the beach in Treasure Island, seashells in hand. “Why wouldn’t we want to go?” The owners of the Airbnb she was staying in appeared to be raising the house with more pilings, she said, but it did not detract from how beautiful the beaches were. For many, the emotional and financial pain of navigating the hurricanes’ aftermath remains acute. John Messmore, who owns Sweet Sage Cafe in North Redington Beach, said that after the floodwaters of Hurricane Helene reached more than three feet inside, “everything was upside down and floating in salt water.” He spent the next few months wrestling with all the paperwork needed to get a building permit. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent just to replace four 80-foot trees behind the cafe, let alone the furniture and supplies inside. “It would have been much easier to turn around and walk away,” said Mr. Messmore, 81, wearing a hat with “Relax” embroidered in gold thread across the front. But, he added, “I just had to make sure it was put back together right.”

If you’re really into the TV show you’re bingeing, you might spend an entire weekend afternoon tearing through episodes—taking stretch breaks or refreshing Reddit or ordering takeout while you’re at it. Now, imagine taking it up a level. If you’re hyperfixated on that show, you’ll be so engrossed you’ll forget to eat or get up to go to the bathroom; you won’t check for new messages on your phone or collect the groceries the delivery guy dropped off, emerging only after you’ve finished the entire series. Advertisement “Hyperfixating is focusing on something with intensity,” says Saba Harouni Lurie, a licensed marriage and family therapist in Los Angeles. “It could be an interest, it could be a person, it could be a hobby, it could be a place—and when you’re very involved with it, often that means other things are going to be disregarded or won't be as interesting.” We asked experts what it really feels like to hyperfixate, and how to address it

About half of Americans have a gun in the home, and hunting is a major reason why. When hunting season rolls around each fall, guns suddenly become more visible: hunters take firearms out of storage, clean and maintain them, and go to the store to purchase more guns and ammunition. As researchers, we wondered if this has any effect on gun injuries: not just during hunting, but overall. To our surprise, it did—in a big way. Published April 16 in the BMJ, our study of four consecutive deer-hunting seasons used data from the Gun Violence Archive, which records firearm incidents from police reports and news outlets and has proven useful for epidemiological study. We looked at different types of firearm incidents across both rural and urban settings. Despite hunting being an activity that is often associated with rural communities, about 75% of deer hunters actually live within metropolitan areas. Advertisement We found that across 10 states, the start of deer hunting season was associated with an uptick in overall firearm incidents—about a 12.3% increase from baseline. There was, not surprisingly, a 566% uptick in hunting-related firearm incidents, but despite this enormous increase, these were still quite rare compared to other incident types.

Nobody will be giving out any medals now that Blue Origin’s eleventh crewed space flight is in the books. The brief suborbital sojourn lifted off April 14, at 8:30 a.m. CDT and landed just 11 minutes later. There was certainly news coverage but not the kind of global audience that has attended other crewed space launches. That’s not the way it was on May 5, 1961, when NASA astronaut Alan Shepard flew a similar flight profile—a popgun trajectory above the atmosphere and a landing just a few hundred miles down range—becoming the first American in space. Shepard earned instant celebrity, visiting President John Kennedy at the White House three days later to receive NASA’s Distinguished Service Medal. Since then, more than 700 people have flown to space, crossing the 50-mile altitude line that was originally considered the boundary between the terrestrial and the extraterrestrial. (In the 1960s, the bar was raised a little bit, to 100 km, or 62 miles, establishing the so-called Kármán line, after the Hungarian-American physicist and engineer Theodore von Kármán.) Blue Origin alone has so far lofted 58 people above the Kármán line over the course of 11 flights since 2021. But this most recent flight, the company said, was special—thanks to the composition of the crew. Aboard the New Shepard spacecraft were six people, including pop star Katy Perry; television personality Gayle King; journalist Lauren Sánchez, who is also engaged to Jeff Bezos, founder of both Amazon and Blue Origin; filmmaker Kerianne Flynn; bioastronautics researcher and advocate for sexual violence survivors—and a TIME Woman of the Year—Amanda Nguyen; and former NASA rocket scientist and CEO of the engineering firm STEMboard, Aisha Bowe. Female astronauts have become commonplace enough that the fact that the crew was composed entirely of women didn't immediately cause a sensation. But the fact is, this was the first time since the Soviet Union’s Valentina Tereshkova flew to orbit alone aboard the Vostok 6 spacecraft in 1963 that no men at all have been aboard a crewed ship. "These women are so badass…they have such amazing life stories, all that they've accomplished," King said on CBS Mornings. "This was never my dream. It was never my dream. And somebody said, ‘Maybe you need to have new dreams, Gayle.’" “If you had told me that I would be part of the first ever all-female crew in space, I would have believed you,” Perry posted on Facebook. “Nothing was beyond my imagination as a child. I can show all of the youngest & most vulnerable among us to reach for the stars, literally and figuratively. I am honored to be among this diverse group of celestial sisters.” In an email blast inviting journalists to cover the launch, Blue Origin referred to the mission’s “epic crew.” But was this really news—or was there at least a whiff of condescension in making a fuss about the fact that a group of women are flying without a man to keep them company? Tereshkova’s flight was 62 years ago. Sally Ride became the first American woman in space 42 years ago. Eileen Collins became the first female shuttle commander 26 years ago. Peggy Whitson became the first female commander of the International Space Station (ISS) 18 years ago. As for NASA’s current record holder for longest cumulative time in space? Whitson again, at 675 days. In 2019, NASA made much hay when astronauts Jessica Meir and Christina Koch performed the first all-female spacewalk and by then the whole idea of marking these moments started to seem old. “Oh I could tell you tales from bygone days of the male engineers’ original ideas of clothing and hygiene products for women astronauts,” wrote retired five-time shuttle astronaut Marsha Ivins for TIME in 2019. “[B]ut we are talking the late ’70s, early ‘80s. By the time I flew in space in the ‘90s, those things had changed; they’d evolved, emerged, progressed and been accommodated for. By then a crew member was just a crew member. The same is true today…Not a big deal. So why the continued insistence on making it a big deal?” Ivins felt much the same about the Blue Origin flight. “​​It was in the mid-1990s … that someone came up with the media stunt to fly an all women shuttle flight,” she wrote in an email to TIME. “It was floated to the women in the office and we all said, ‘oh HELL no!’ Personally I found the whole concept insulting. We were always part of a crew, working together to ensure the success of a mission, gender had exactly zero to do with it.” Not that career astronauts see no merit at all in the flights Blue Origin makes. “Space tourist flights like Blue Origin’s New Shepard are positive in so many ways,” writes retired astronaut and former ISS commander Terry Virts in an email. “They support the burgeoning commercial space industry, and they allow more humans to see our beautiful planet from outer space and experience the amazing sensation of weightlessness.” The key nouns here are “tourists” and “humans,” not “men” or “women” or, significantly, “astronauts.” Passengers aboard a New Shepard ship pay for the privilege of flying, and while Blue Origin does not go public with what a ticket costs, the company does require that a refundable $150,000 deposit accompany an initial application to go aloft. All the same, it does take at least a little courage and a bit of grit to make a New Shepard flight. The rocket reaches a velocity of over 2,200 mph, or close to Mach 3, on the way up, plunges back through the atmosphere like a cannonball after a few minutes of weightlessness, and depends on a parachute to bring the passengers home safely—not the kind of chances every traveler would want to take. But that risk applies to everyone equally—with the physics of the flight not giving a fig about who’s in the seat. “The fact that this is an all-female crew is basically irrelevant,” says John Logsdon, professor emeritus at George Washington University and the former director of the school’s Space Policy Institute before the launch. “Women are just as capable as men, and in fact there is very little piloting involved. I see this as a way of attracting future business to what is basically adventure travel.” If there is an example of space diversity that does warrant celebration, it’s in the upcoming plans for NASA’s Artemis astronauts to return to the moon. Artemis II, scheduled for a translunar mission late in 2026, includes crewmembers Christina Koch and Victor Glover, who will become the first woman and the first Black person to make a lunar trip. The Apollo moon missions were arguably the greatest exploration exercises in human history and women and people of color were entirely excluded from them. That is a true wrong that the nation is setting out to right—and well it should.

In the latest switch-up in the rollercoaster of events that have followed the April 2 announcement of President Donald Trump’s “reciprocal” tariffs, the Trump Administration has said that some electronics will be exempt from these tariffs. A notice from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), posted late on Friday night, stated that certain electronic devices will be exempt—including smartphones, laptops, hard drives, flat-panel monitors, and machines used to make semiconductors and some chips. The notice said that the exemption applies to products entering the United States or removed from warehouses dating back to April 5. This means these products can now bypass the significantly high “reciprocal” tariffs on China, where Apple has manufactured most of its iPhones since the first model hit the market 18 years ago. However, as Stephen Miller, Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, pointed out on X on Saturday, these electronics are still “subject to the tariff under the original IEEPA on China of 20 percent.” The tariffs would likely have made a large impact on the purchase of electronics, and by extension, on tech giants such as Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia and Samsung, as many of their supply chains are based in China and other countries outside of the U.S. Some experts estimated that with the tariffs, and before the exemption, the iPhone could have cost thousands more for U.S. consumers, especially if made in the U.S. Trump has previously encouraged tech giants to move their companies and manufacturing to the U.S., and referenced Apple’s February announcement that it plans to invest $500 billion in the U.S. in the next four years. ExploreClose Subscribe Apr 13, 2025 12:49 AM IST Are Smartphones and Laptops Exempt From Trump’s ‘Reciprocal’ Tariffs? Here’s What to Know Politics Trump Administration Rebecca Schneid by Rebecca Schneid Reporter US-POLITICS-TRUMP-RETURN President Donald Trump speaks to reporters equipped with smartphones while aboard Air Force One on April 6, 2025.Mandel Ngan—Getty Images In the latest switch-up in the rollercoaster of events that have followed the April 2 announcement of President Donald Trump’s “reciprocal” tariffs, the Trump Administration has said that some electronics will be exempt from these tariffs. A notice from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), posted late on Friday night, stated that certain electronic devices will be exempt—including smartphones, laptops, hard drives, flat-panel monitors, and machines used to make semiconductors and some chips. The notice said that the exemption applies to products entering the United States or removed from warehouses dating back to April 5. Advertisement 00:03 03:00 Read More This means these products can now bypass the significantly high “reciprocal” tariffs on China, where Apple has manufactured most of its iPhones since the first model hit the market 18 years ago. However, as Stephen Miller, Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, pointed out on X on Saturday, these electronics are still “subject to the tariff under the original IEEPA on China of 20 percent.” The tariffs would likely have made a large impact on the purchase of electronics, and by extension, on tech giants such as Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia and Samsung, as many of their supply chains are based in China and other countries outside of the U.S. Some experts estimated that with the tariffs, and before the exemption, the iPhone could have cost thousands more for U.S. consumers, especially if made in the U.S. Trump has previously encouraged tech giants to move their companies and manufacturing to the U.S., and referenced Apple’s February announcement that it plans to invest $500 billion in the U.S. in the next four years. In a Truth Social post on April 9, Trump said: “This is a GREAT time to move your COMPANY into the United States of America, like Apple, and so many others, in record numbers, are doing. ZERO TARIFFS, and almost immediate Electrical/Energy hook ups and approvals. No Environmental Delays. DON’T WAIT, DO IT NOW!” However, as the Washington Post notes, Apple has a complex system that extends beyond the U.S. While their iPhones are designed in California, they are assembled in China and India, with parts sourced from various suppliers. The notice about exemptions comes after Trump reportedly teased the idea while talking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday. “There could be a couple of exceptions for obvious reasons, but I would say 10% is a floor,” said Trump. He did not specify what those reasons were. Experts have been concerned about how Trump’s tariffs would impact consumers as prices are expected to rise. It’s worth noting that China was the second-largest supplier of U.S. goods in 2024, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. (Mexico was the top source of U.S. imports.) China is especially known for supplying broadcasting equipment and computers to the U.S. The exemption move is the latest change in Trump’s tariffs plan. U.S. and global stocks tanked, prompting fears of a recession, after Trump announced what he refers to as “reciprocal” tariffs on April 2, a day he coined “Liberation Day.” However, on April 9, Trump announced a 90-day pause for most of the “reciprocal” tariffs, with the exception of China, who were hit with much higher import taxes. The tariffs on China now total 145%—a 125% “reciprocal” tariff and a 20% tariff on most goods, as a punishment for the flow of fentanyl into the United States. China has since hit back at the U.S., raising the tariffs on American goods to 125%.