Iranian military leadership has suffered a significant blow amid escalating Middle East hostilities. The commander-in-chief of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps has been reported dead following Israeli airstrikes.
According to The Daily Caller, Iranian state media confirmed that Israel killed IRGC commander-in-chief Hossein Salami in major airstrikes targeting Iran on Thursday night. The attack specifically targeted Iranian leadership, nuclear scientists, and nuclear facilities across the Islamic Republic.
Israel has declared a state of emergency in anticipation of potential Iranian retaliation. Salami, who was designated as a terrorist by the United States, had issued warnings to Israel just hours before the strikes occurred.
Israel's Preemptive Strike Strategy
The Israeli military launched what appears to be a coordinated operation aimed at crippling Iran's nuclear capabilities and eliminating key leadership figures. Israeli forces reportedly targeted multiple nuclear facilities across Iran in an effort to derail the regime's nuclear ambitions.
Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has begun calling up "tens of thousands" of soldiers, signaling preparation for potential escalation. This mobilization demonstrates Israel's readiness to defend against any retaliatory actions from Iran or its proxies throughout the region.
IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir emphasized the necessity of the operation, stating, "Recent and past events of history have taught us that when the enemy is attempting to destroy us, we must not turn a blind eye. We need to fight for our existence, freedom was given to those willing to fight for it."
US Position and Precautions
The United States has made clear it was not involved in the Israeli strikes against Iran. Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a statement distancing America from the operation while acknowledging Israel's right to self-defense.
Rubio's statement emphasized American priorities in the region, particularly the safety of US personnel. "Tonight, Israel took unilateral action against Iran. We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region," he said.
In anticipation of regional instability, the State Department partially evacuated multiple US military and diplomatic locations throughout the Middle East on Wednesday. This preemptive move highlights the serious nature of the escalation and American concerns about potential blowback.
Salami's Final Warning
The slain Iranian commander had issued explicit threats to Israel shortly before the airstrikes that claimed his life. Salami warned that Iran would launch major retaliatory actions against Israel if it decided to attack Iranian territory.
As commander-in-chief of the IRGC, Salami held one of the most powerful positions in Iran's military and political structure. The Revolutionary Guard Corps represents the elite military force of Iran, responsible for both external operations and internal security.
Salami had been a key figure in Iran's regional strategy, overseeing operations supporting proxy groups across the Middle East. His elimination represents a significant tactical victory for Israel in its ongoing conflict with Iran.
Regional Implications Escalate
The Israeli strikes marked a dramatic escalation in the long-simmering conflict between Israel and Iran. With the elimination of Iran's top military commander and attacks on nuclear facilities, Israel has demonstrated both capability and willingness to take direct action against the Iranian regime.
Israel's declaration of a state of emergency indicates serious concerns about Iranian retaliation. Previous cycles of conflict between Israel and Iranian proxies suggest that response could come through direct missile strikes or through proxy forces in Lebanon, Syria, or elsewhere.
The death of Hossein Salami, a U.S.-designated terrorist and commander-in-chief of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, came during major Israeli airstrikes targeting Iran on Thursday night. These strikes specifically focused on Iranian leadership, nuclear scientists, and nuclear facilities across the country, according to Iranian state media reports.
Gun control activist David Hogg found himself at the center of a political firestorm following his removal from the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. The Parkland shooting survivor was escorted out of the United Center during President Biden's speech on Monday night.
According to The Hill, Hogg was removed after joining protesters chanting "cease-fire now" during Biden's address. His ejection from the convention has sparked heated debate across political lines about free speech and the Democratic Party's handling of dissent.
Hogg later clarified his position on social media, explaining that while he opposes Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's policies, he does not support Hamas. The activist, who rose to prominence after surviving the 2018 Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, emphasized his concerns about civilian casualties in Gaza.
Controversial Convention Moment
Security personnel approached Hogg and other protesters during Biden's speech when they began chanting anti-war slogans. Video footage shows Hogg being physically escorted from the convention floor alongside other demonstrators expressing opposition to the administration's Israel policy.
Democratic officials defended the removal, citing convention rules prohibiting disruptions during official speeches. Party representatives stated that while diverse viewpoints are welcome within the Democratic coalition, the prime-time addresses require decorum and respect for speakers.
Critics, however, have accused the party of silencing legitimate dissent on a crucial foreign policy issue. Progressive organizations pointed to polling showing significant portions of Democratic voters, particularly younger ones, opposing continued military support for Israel without humanitarian conditions.
Hogg Responds To Criticism
Following his removal, Hogg took to social media platform X to clarify his position. He expressed frustration at what he characterized as oversimplification of his views on the complex Middle East conflict.
"To be clear I can both be against Netanyahu's far right government's actions and against Hamas. I'm against all terrorism," Hogg wrote. His comments reflect the challenging position many progressive Democrats have taken – criticizing both Hamas's October 7 attack and the subsequent Israeli military response.
Hogg further explained that he attended the convention to support Democratic candidates and policies on gun violence prevention, his primary advocacy focus since surviving the Parkland tragedy. He emphasized that disagreement on one issue should not negate cooperation on others.
Party Division Exposed
The incident highlights deep divisions within the Democratic Party regarding U.S. policy toward Israel. While the party's leadership, including President Biden, has maintained strong support for Israel, a growing faction of progressive and younger Democrats has called for conditions on military aid.
Several Democratic lawmakers expressed concern about the optics of removing protesters. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez noted that the party should "make space for dissenting voices" while Senator Bernie Sanders emphasized that "democratic debate is essential to our values."
Convention organizers defended their actions, stating that all attendees agree to certain conduct rules when receiving credentials. They pointed out that designated protest areas existed outside the convention hall for those wishing to express opposition to specific policies.
Activism Continues Despite Setback
Despite the controversy, Hogg indicated he remains committed to working within the Democratic Party on multiple issues, particularly gun violence prevention. His organization, March For Our Lives, continues advocating for stricter gun control legislation nationwide.
The incident has not diminished Hogg's resolve to engage in political activism. He emphasized that effective advocacy sometimes requires challenging party leadership while still supporting broader Democratic priorities against Republican alternatives.
Hogg's fellow Parkland activists offered mixed reactions to his protest. Some supported his stance on Gaza, while others expressed concern that the controversy might distract from their shared gun safety advocacy goals during a crucial election season.
President Trump's 79th birthday celebration coincides with a massive military parade marking the Army's 250th anniversary, but forecasts of stormy weather threaten to dampen the festivities in Washington, DC. The White House remains determined to proceed with the event despite potential weather challenges.
According to the New York Post, White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly affirmed the administration's commitment to the celebration. "Any changes to the Army Birthday Parade will be announced by the Department of Defense or America 250 Commission," Kelly stated.
Weather forecasts predict scattered thunderstorms potentially striking around 6:30 p.m. on Saturday, precisely when the parade is scheduled to begin. The day is expected to be cloudy and humid, with temperatures around 80 degrees, with thunderstorm risks increasing from mid-afternoon onward.
Military display faces weather challenges
An Army spokesperson told The Times of London that while rain alone wouldn't halt the proceedings, lightning presents a serious safety concern. "Rain won't stop us, the tanks don't melt, but if there's lightning then that puts the crowd at risk... they will disperse the crowd and even cancel or postpone the parade," chief spokesperson Steve Warren explained.
The parade preparations have already begun, with rows of tanks arriving in Washington this week. Approximately 150 military vehicles will be displayed alongside over 6,500 soldiers and 50 aircraft, according to Army statements.
A reviewing stand continues to be constructed in front of the White House ahead of Saturday's events. Following the parade, additional celebrations, including a concert at The Ellipse and fireworks, are planned, though these could also be affected by the weather conditions.
Cost concerns amid celebration plans
The massive military spectacle carries a substantial price tag estimated between $25 million and $45 million. This expenditure has drawn criticism from some who question whether such a display represents an appropriate use of resources.
President Trump has dismissed these concerns, characterizing the cost as "peanuts" compared to the value of celebrating America's military strength. "We have the greatest missiles in the world. We have the greatest submarines in the world. We have the greatest army tanks in the world," Trump told NBC News.
The parade represents a significant show of military might, featuring advanced weapons systems and equipment. Critics have questioned the necessity of such displays, though military parades have precedents in American history.
Weather contingency remains unclear
White House representatives emphasized their commitment to honoring the military regardless of weather conditions. "No matter what, a historic celebration of our military service members will take place!" Kelly assured the public.
The Department of Defense has deferred comment on contingency plans to the Army, which had not immediately responded to requests for additional information at the time of reporting. The final decision regarding any postponement may ultimately rest with the president himself.
Fox Weather meteorologist Samantha Thomas confirmed the weather outlook for Saturday, noting increased chances of thunderstorms beginning around 3 p.m. This timing creates particular uncertainty for the evening parade and subsequent events.
Presidential birthday celebrations continue
The dual celebration of the Army's milestone anniversary and the president's 79th birthday has been positioned as a patriotic tribute to American military strength. Trump has personally championed the event as an opportunity to showcase America's military capabilities.
Military assets, including Sikorsky Black Hawk helicopters and Stryker armored vehicles, have been staged along the National Mall and Potomac River in preparation for the event. These deployments represent significant logistical operations to ensure the parade's planned scale and impact.
The uncertain weather conditions present challenges for organizers and attendees alike. Officials will be monitoring forecasts closely in the coming days to determine whether schedule adjustments become necessary for public safety concerns.
A South Carolina lawmaker with a history of advocating for child protection has been arrested on disturbing charges involving the exploitation of minors. Republican Representative Robert "RJ" May now faces serious allegations that starkly contrast with his public persona.
According to the New York Post, federal prosecutors have charged May with distributing more than 200 files of child pornography online while using the screen name "joebidennnn69" and other usernames. The 38-year-old lawmaker was arrested Wednesday at his Lexington County home following a months-long investigation.
The three-term representative, who founded the House Freedom Caucus in South Carolina, allegedly shared 220 files containing graphic footage of children on the messaging app Kik over a five-day period last spring. Federal authorities claim the married father of two downloaded these files using his home Wi-Fi network and personal cellphone.
Investigation Revealed Disturbing Evidence
Homeland Security agents executed a search warrant at May's residence in August 2024, seizing nearly three dozen electronic devices, including laptops, cell phones, hard drives, and thumb drives. The raid came after Kik flagged suspicious activity to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in April 2024.
Prosecutors alleged that some files were hidden using a private network while others were directly linked to May's personal IP address. The Republican lawmaker's legal team has suggested someone else might have been using his WiFi password to download and share the illicit material.
A Department of Homeland Security official testified that investigators also discovered videos of May allegedly engaging in sex with what appeared to be underage women during trips to Colombia. These women were reportedly paid, adding another disturbing dimension to the case.
Political Fallout Begins
The House Freedom Caucus acted swiftly following May's arrest, expelling him from their ranks on Wednesday. Former allies are now calling for his resignation from the state legislature, where he has served since 2020.
May had positioned himself as a hardline conservative who championed family values and child protection. His arrest represents a stunning contradiction to his public statements, including remarks made earlier this year during a debate on transgender care for minors.
During that January 2024 debate, just months after federal agents had already searched his home, May stated: "We as legislators have an obligation to ensure that our children have no harm done to them." This statement now carries deeply troubling implications, given the charges against him.
Legal Consequences Mount
A federal judge ordered May to remain in jail until his trial, denying bail partly because his own children are reportedly the same age as many of those who were exploited in the materials he allegedly distributed.
The 10-count indictment against May charges him with distributing child sex abuse material. Each count carries a potential sentence of five to 20 years in prison if he is convicted.
Prosecutors emphasized the severity of the allegations, noting the extremely graphic nature of the content involved. The material allegedly included footage of children and toddlers engaged in sex acts.
Shocking Hypocrisy Exposed
The arrest of Representative May has sent shockwaves through South Carolina's political landscape, particularly given his public stance on protecting children and family values. The alleged use of a username referencing President Biden adds a political dimension to an already disturbing case.
May's political career had been built on conservative principles as part of a movement that positioned itself to the right of many mainstream Republicans in the state. He was first elected in 2020 and had risen to prominence as the founder of the state's House Freedom Caucus.
The stark contrast between May's public advocacy and the allegations against him has left colleagues and constituents stunned. The case highlights the troubling reality that those who speak most forcefully about protecting children may sometimes be hiding their own exploitation of the vulnerable.
The U.S. Supreme Court just demonstrated unusual unanimity by issuing four decisions with all nine justices in agreement on Thursday. These rulings arrived amid ongoing concerns about public confidence in the nation's highest court.
According to Newsweek, the court delivered unanimous opinions in four separate cases: A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, Soto v. United States, Martin v. United States, and Rivers v. Guerrero. The decisions addressed issues ranging from disability rights in education to combat veteran benefits.
The court, which currently holds a 6-3 conservative majority, often faces criticism for voting along ideological lines. However, data shows unanimous decisions are more common than many Americans might expect, with 44 percent of cases decided unanimously in 2023 and 50 percent in 2022.
Falling public confidence
Recent polling reveals a troubling trend in Americans' view of the Supreme Court. Only 47 percent of Americans expressed a favorable opinion of the court, while 51 percent hold an unfavorable view, according to a 2024 Pew Research Center survey.
These numbers represent a dramatic decline from 1987, when 76 percent of Americans viewed the court favorably and just 17 percent held unfavorable opinions. The shift reflects increasing public perception that the court has become politicized.
Democrats are significantly more likely than Republicans to believe justices are failing to keep personal politics out of their decisions. This partisan divide has deepened following several high-profile rulings that split along ideological lines, including the 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Key decisions explained
In A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, Chief Justice John Roberts authored an opinion establishing that schoolchildren with disabilities don't need to prove "bad faith or gross misjudgment" when bringing discrimination claims. The case involved a student with epilepsy who was denied evening instruction accommodations.
The Court also ruled unanimously in favor of Marine Corps veteran Simon Soto, determining that the six-year limitations period under the Barring Act doesn't apply to claims brought under the Combat-Related Special Compensation statute. This allows Soto to pursue retroactive benefits for service-related PTSD.
In Martin v. United States, justices unanimously ruled that a Georgia family can proceed with a lawsuit against the federal government after FBI agents mistakenly raided their home. The decision found that the Federal Tort Claims Act doesn't shield the government from liability in such cases.
Legal experts respond
Patrick Jaicomo, who represents the plaintiffs in Martin v. U.S., expressed satisfaction with the Court's decision and commitment to continuing the legal fight.
"We look forward to continuing this fight with the Martins in the Eleventh Circuit and making it easier for everyday people to hold the government accountable for its mistaken and intentional violations of individual rights," Jaicomo stated.
Roman Martinez, lawyer for Ava Tharpe in A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, told Reuters: "[The ruling is] a great win for Ava, and for children with disabilities facing discrimination in schools across the country...We are grateful to the Supreme Court for its decision holding that these children should enjoy the same rights and protections as all other Americans with disabilities."
Political science professor Michael Salamone explained that unanimous rulings might reflect strategic thinking by the justices. "The justices may also believe they have more credibility when they rule unanimously, and they may therefore strategically compromise to achieve a united front," he told Newsweek.
Implications for court credibility
The cluster of unanimous decisions comes at a critical time for the Supreme Court's public image. With confidence in the institution at historic lows, these rulings may help counter perceptions of a deeply divided court.
However, experts like Salamone note that unanimous decisions often receive less media attention than divisive ones. "The Supreme Court tends to rule unanimously more frequently than a lot of people expect...I find that this is because divided cases get more coverage—not only are the issues that divide the justices often more politically salient, but also the partisan divisions on the Court themselves are newsworthy," he explained.
President Trump acknowledged Thursday that his administration's aggressive immigration enforcement is causing significant labor shortages in key American industries. The admission comes as farmers and hospitality businesses report losing long-term workers to deportation efforts.
According to the New York Post, Trump posted on Truth Social that the current immigration policies are removing valuable workers from farms and hotels, creating positions that are "almost impossible to replace."
In his social media statement, Trump specifically highlighted concerns about losing reliable workers while emphasizing his continued commitment to removing criminals. "This is not good. We must protect our Farmers, but get the CRIMINALS OUT OF THE USA. Changes are coming," the president wrote.
Enforcement intensifies nationwide
The president's comments follow a significant escalation in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations across the country. Federal officials have stated their goal is to detain approximately 3,000 people daily as part of what Trump has called the largest deportation effort in American history.
More than 70 individuals were arrested this week during an ICE raid at a meat processing plant in Omaha, Nebraska. Similar enforcement actions have occurred at agricultural sites in California, where agents were seen detaining workers in blueberry fields.
The crackdown extends beyond agricultural settings to construction sites, restaurants, and even day laborer gathering spots outside home improvement stores. This widespread enforcement has created uncertainty for both employers and immigrant communities.
Economic consequences emerge
The intensified immigration enforcement is creating ripple effects throughout the American economy. Agriculture officials estimate that nearly half of the country's 850,000 crop workers are undocumented, putting the nation's food supply chain at risk.
Farmers in both Republican and Democratic states report difficulties finding replacement workers, particularly for seasonal labor positions that few native-born Americans are willing to fill. The labor shortage comes at a critical time for many agricultural operations.
The retail sector is also feeling the impact, with major brands reporting significant drops in Hispanic customer traffic. Market research firm Kantar found that in-person shopping by Hispanic consumers fell from 62% to 53% in the first quarter of 2025, while online purchases increased.
Labor shortage versus security concerns
Speaking to reporters at the White House Thursday, Trump elaborated on the need for a more nuanced approach. He described scenarios where farm owners have employed the same workers for decades despite their undocumented status.
"We can't take farmers and take all their people and send them back because they don't have maybe what they're supposed to have," Trump explained. "They've been there for 20, 25 years and they've worked great. And the owner of the farm loves them and everything else."
The president suggested that removing these established workers could lead to worse outcomes if farmers are forced to hire recent arrivals with criminal backgrounds. "And then you're supposed to throw them out and you know what happens? They end up hiring the people, the criminals that have come in," Trump said.
Policy adjustments forthcoming
Trump's recognition of economic consequences signals a potential shift in his administration's approach to immigration enforcement. His comments suggest that workplace raids might be modified to focus more specifically on individuals with criminal records.
Industry leaders have called for temporary worker permits or exemptions for long-term employees without criminal histories. Such adjustments could address labor shortages while maintaining the administration's border security objectives.
The president indicated that official policy changes would be announced soon, telling reporters: "We're going to have an order on that pretty soon." Any policy adjustment would need to balance Trump's campaign promises on immigration enforcement with the economic realities facing American businesses.
Harvey Weinstein, the disgraced film producer, has been found guilty on one count of criminal sexual act in the first degree in his New York retrial. The verdict comes after nearly a week of tense deliberations that almost led to a mistrial due to conflicts among jurors.
According to The Guardian, Weinstein was convicted of sexually assaulting Miriam Haley but acquitted on a charge involving Kaja Sokola. The jury remains deadlocked on a third charge involving Jessica Mann, with the judge instructing them to continue deliberations.
The partial verdict represents a significant moment in Weinstein's legal saga, which has included multiple trials across different jurisdictions. This retrial came after his original 2020 New York conviction, which resulted in a 23-year sentence, was overturned on appeal.
Courtroom Tensions Flare
Before the verdict was announced, Weinstein himself addressed the court in a dramatic plea for a mistrial, citing reports of hostility among jurors. The 72-year-old producer, who attended proceedings in a wheelchair while undergoing treatment for leukemia, appeared distressed.
"This is my life that's on the line," Weinstein told Judge Curtis Farber. "I am not getting a fair trial. You are endangering me, Your Honor."
The jury deliberations had been notably contentious, with the foreperson requesting to speak privately with the judge about a troubling situation. The juror reportedly expressed concerns after another panelist made comments that could be interpreted as threatening, saying "I'll meet you outside one day" amid "yelling and screaming."
Accusers Respond To Verdict
Miriam Haley, the production assistant whose testimony led to Weinstein's conviction, expressed hope following the verdict. She highlighted the broader implications of the case for sexual assault survivors.
"Hope that there is new awareness around sexual violence and that the myth of the perfect victim is fading. I hope that this result empowers others to speak out and seek justice," Haley stated after the verdict.
Kaja Sokola, despite the acquittal on charges related to her allegations, called the outcome "a big win for everyone" and expressed hope that her testimony would encourage others to come forward. Meanwhile, Jessica Mann, whose rape allegation remains under deliberation, released a statement defending her testimony.
"I would never lie about rape or use something so traumatic to hurt someone. Rape can happen in relationships – and in dynamics where power and manipulation control the narrative," Mann stated, also accusing Weinstein's legal team of conducting a smear campaign against her.
#MeToo Movement Legacy
The retrial has been viewed as a test of the enduring impact of the #MeToo movement, which Weinstein's original case helped propel into the mainstream. The movement's visibility has diminished in recent years as other social justice causes gained prominence.
Throughout the three-week trial, Weinstein maintained his innocence, with his defense team arguing that all interactions with his accusers were consensual. His attorney, Arthur Aidala, characterized the relationships as "mutually beneficial," suggesting the women received auditions and other professional opportunities.
The defense strategy included testimony from friends of Sokola and Mann who claimed neither woman had contemporaneously reported being assaulted. Prosecutors countered that Weinstein had exploited his industry power to lure women with career promises before sexually assaulting them.
Legal Saga Continues
Weinstein now faces complex legal challenges following this mixed verdict in New York. The former Hollywood powerhouse was previously sentenced to 16 years in prison in California on separate sexual assault charges, a conviction that remains in place. The jury's continued deliberation on the Mann allegation leaves one aspect of the case unresolved. Mann testified during the trial that she never reported Weinstein's assault at the time because she feared she wouldn't be believed and was concerned about potential retaliation.
Weinstein's legal team had repeatedly sought a mistrial during deliberations, pointing to the reported tensions among jurors as evidence of a flawed process. The partial verdict marks another chapter in a legal battle that has become emblematic of accountability efforts for powerful men accused of sexual misconduct.
A once-celebrated mall fashion brand is dramatically scaling back its physical presence. Plus-size retailer Torrid has announced plans to shutter nearly 200 locations nationwide following disappointing sales figures in an increasingly challenging retail environment.
According to Daily Mail, Torrid will close approximately 180 stores after experiencing a 4.9 percent decrease in net sales. The closures represent nearly a third of the company's current 658 locations, bringing their total store count down to around 450.
CEO Lisa Harper framed the decision as part of a strategic pivot toward e-commerce, noting that 70 percent of Torrid's customers already shop online. The company aims to eventually generate 75 percent of its sales through digital channels, with physical stores accounting for just 25 percent.
Celebrity partnerships couldn't prevent decline
Torrid, founded in 2001, built its reputation as a pioneer in the plus-size fashion market with high-profile collaborations and fashion industry milestones. The brand partnered with celebrities, including Rebel Wilson, who launched the "Rebel for Torrid" collection in 2015.
The retailer made history in 2014 when it featured Georgina Burke as its first official face, further cementing its status in the fashion world. Three years later, Torrid broke new ground again by becoming the first plus-size label to present at New York Fashion Week.
Despite these achievements and collaborations with designers like Betsey Johnson and models like Tara Lynn, the company has struggled to maintain sales growth in recent years. Retail expert Neil Saunders told Daily Mail that Torrid's declining sales have put "store productivity under pressure," ultimately damaging profitability.
Employees blindsided by closure announcements
The store closure announcement has reportedly left many Torrid employees feeling shocked and betrayed. Some staff members claim they first learned about the closures from customers who asked questions after seeing news reports.
One employee expressed frustration on Instagram, writing: "When customers started asking me during my shift if our location was the one closing, I had nothing to say... because I didn't know either. I was completely in the dark and had to go online to see what they were talking about."
Another employee described the situation as "confusing, disheartening, and honestly just sad," adding: "We're the ones holding the stores together, and yet we're the last to know? It shouldn't be like this." The company has not yet released a complete list of which locations will be shuttered.
Part of broader retail apocalypse
Torrid's downsizing comes amid what many industry observers have labeled a "retail apocalypse" affecting brick-and-mortar stores across the United States. The trend has accelerated dramatically over the past year, with retailers closing approximately 7,300 stores through mid-December 2024—nearly 60 percent more than in 2023.
Department store giant Macy's is currently in the process of closing 150 underperforming locations, including its Center City, Philadelphia store. Several other well-known retailers have filed for bankruptcy protection, including Forever 21 and pharmacy chain Rite Aid, which entered its second bankruptcy in two years.
Home improvement and decor retailers have been particularly hard hit. Bed Bath & Beyond, Christmas Tree Shops, Bargain Hunt, Conn's, and LL Flooring all announced bankruptcies and store closures, though The Container Store and LL Flooring have since emerged from bankruptcy proceedings.
Digital transformation strategy
Retail analyst Neil Saunders believes Torrid's store closures represent a sensible strategy that will free up capital for marketing and product development. The company will also invest in remaining stores that show growth potential.
Beyond store closures, Torrid has made other operational changes, including discontinuing its shoe line. The company cited rising costs from tariffs imposed under President Trump as the reason for this decision.
Harper's strategy appears focused on adapting to changing consumer habits rather than simply cutting costs. With most Torrid customers already shopping online, the company aims to strengthen its digital presence while maintaining a more targeted physical footprint.
While her husband fought to contain escalating civil unrest, California first lady Jennifer Siebel Newsom has drawn criticism for spending Monday picking up skincare products amid the chaos of the Los Angeles riots. The timing of her personal errand has sparked controversy as federal troops moved into the city.
According to the Daily Mail, Newsom's representatives defended her actions, stating she "didn't have a spa treatment yesterday, but she does have a prior skin cancer diagnosis and was picking up skin care products on her personal time." The explanation came after reports suggested she was shopping while civil unrest continued.
The controversy unfolds as Governor Gavin Newsom battles with President Trump over control of the riot response. Both the governor and LA Mayor Karen Bass have demanded Trump withdraw military troops from the streets, insisting local authorities have the situation under control.
Political standoff intensifies
President Trump has activated 4,000 National Guard troops and deployed hundreds of U.S. Marines to Los Angeles despite strong objections from state and local leaders. The move represents a significant escalation in the federal response to the ongoing unrest.
Governor Newsom has characterized Trump's deployment as illegal and counterproductive, filing a lawsuit Monday challenging the president's authority to activate the Guard without the governor's consent. The deployment marks the first time in decades a president has activated the National Guard without a governor's request.
"This isn't about public safety," Newsom wrote on social media. "It's about stroking a dangerous President's ego." The governor has maintained that the president's characterization of the protests as a violent occupation greatly exaggerates the situation on the ground.
Riots continue across city
The unrest began Friday when anti-ICE protesters responded to immigration raids across Los Angeles. What started as demonstrations quickly escalated to include property damage, looting, and confrontations with law enforcement.
Protesters have blocked major freeways, thrown objects at officers, and gathered outside a federal detention center chanting "free them all" while waving Mexican and Central American flags. Police have responded with tear gas, pepper balls, and flash-bang grenades to disperse crowds.
By Monday evening, Mayor Karen Bass reported that more than 100 people had been arrested, though she emphasized that the majority of protesters were nonviolent. The situation took a darker turn Tuesday morning with the discovery of a body outside one of the looted stores.
Federal response expands
Trump's decision to mobilize 700 Marines based in Southern California has drawn criticism from Democratic lawmakers. Senator Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, expressed being "gravely troubled" by the deployment of active-duty military personnel.
"Since our nation's founding, the American people have been perfectly clear: we do not want the military conducting law enforcement on US soil," Reed stated. The use of active military to respond to civil disturbances remains extremely rare in American history.
The protests have spread beyond Los Angeles to neighboring Orange County and at least nine other U.S. cities, including New York, Philadelphia, and San Francisco. In Austin, Texas, police used non-lethal munitions and detained several protesters during clashes with demonstrators.
Governor's leadership questioned
Jennifer Siebel Newsom's decision to run personal errands during the crisis has added another dimension to questions about state leadership during the emergency. Her representatives have pushed back forcefully against any suggestion she was being insensitive to the situation.
The First Lady previously shared her battle with skin cancer in 2023, which her office cited as context for her skincare errand. However, critics have questioned the timing of her personal shopping while Marines were being deployed to Los Angeles streets.
Governor Newsom continues to insist he has the situation under control despite Trump's claims that the city would be "burning to the ground right now" without federal intervention. The president doubled down on this assertion in a Tuesday morning post on his Truth Social platform.
Senator Bernie Moreno has called for California Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass to be subpoenaed to testify before Congress regarding their handling of recent riots in Los Angeles. The unrest erupted over Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in the city.
According to Breitbart, the Ohio Republican made this request during a Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee hearing on Tuesday, expressing grave concerns about the officials' responses to the violence.
The riots began after ICE agents arrested criminal illegal aliens in Los Angeles, prompting protesters to take to the streets with Mexican flags. Demonstrators reportedly assaulted law enforcement officers, set vehicles ablaze, and damaged property throughout the city.
Federal and local tensions escalate
President Donald Trump deployed the National Guard and additional federal law enforcement to Los Angeles in an attempt to restore order. This decision has created significant friction with state and local officials.
Governor Newsom responded by filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration over the National Guard deployment. He has also reportedly challenged border czar Thomas Homan to arrest him over his handling of the situation.
Mayor Bass has publicly criticized federal immigration enforcement actions, telling CNN, "If immigration raids had not happened here, we would not have the disorder that went on last night." She attributed the unrest to the city's "rapid response network" that mobilizes when ICE operations are detected.
Senator's congressional testimony demand
Senator Moreno expressed deep concern about the officials' positions during Tuesday's committee hearing, suggesting their responses were inadequate and potentially dangerous.
"You have the Governor and the Mayor saying the President of the United States is doing too much to protect businesses and protect their own civilians," Moreno stated during the hearing. "How are we not heading towards a complete and utter disaster?"
The senator specifically requested that Bass and Newsom appear before the committee to explain their actions and outline how their approach would differ for future events, particularly with major international gatherings planned for 2026 and 2028.
Ongoing immigration enforcement debate
The Los Angeles riots represent the latest flashpoint in the contentious national debate over immigration enforcement policies and the role of sanctuary jurisdictions.
Bass has defended the protesters, suggesting that ICE operations are the root cause of the unrest rather than the violent response from demonstrators. She has characterized federal immigration enforcement as creating "a recipe for pandemonium that is completely unnecessary."
Meanwhile, federal officials maintain that ICE agents were simply enforcing existing immigration laws by targeting criminal illegal aliens for arrest and deportation, activities that fall squarely within their authorized duties.
Political ramifications unfold
The confrontation between federal, state, and local authorities highlights deepening political divisions over immigration enforcement in the United States.
Republican lawmakers like Moreno are positioning themselves as defenders of law and order, supporting President Trump's deployment of federal resources to quell the violence. They've criticized Democratic officials for what they characterize as prioritizing protection of illegal immigrants over public safety.
Democratic leaders, including Newsom and Bass, have framed the issue differently, suggesting that aggressive immigration enforcement tactics are unnecessarily provocative and counterproductive to maintaining peace in diverse communities.
