House passes Pentagon funding and limits on stock trades in a last dash before recess

Proposed rules would have US regulator block the entry of swarm-capable drones, mainly from China.The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has moved to prohibit imports of advanced drones, mainly from China, citing mounting national security concerns over military-grade technology.Under the proposed rules announced on Tuesday, the US regulator will block the entry of drones equipped with swarming capabilities and infrared sensors for high-resolution thermal imaging.Recommended Stories list of 3 itemslist 1 of 3US attacks Iran for 11th consecutive nightlist 2 of 3Trump administration attacks US left, alleging Cuba ties: Key takeawayslist 3 of 3US defence chief Hegseth puts Iran war cost at $37.5bn so farend of listMeanwhile, exemptions for components produced outside China, introduced in December, have been extended until January 2028, suggesting a focus on isolating Chinese manufacturers, such as DJI and Autel Robotics.The move comes days after US President Donald Trump accused China of interfering in the 2020 US elections. It signals a hardening of Washington’s stance against foreign-made surveillance technology, while attempting to mitigate immediate supply chain shocks for domestic users.FCC officials said the measures were necessary to “secure the drone supply chain” and prevent sensitive data from being accessed by foreign states.In 2022, the FCC banned telecommunications and video surveillance equipment from prominent Chinese brands, including Huawei and ZTE, citing an “unacceptable risk to national security”.US security officials have warned that equipment from Chinese brands such as Huawei could be used to interfere with fifth-generation (5G) wireless networks and collect sensitive information.One of the largest manufacturers of telecommunications equipment in the world, Huawei has had an embattled relationship with the US and its allies, facing some of the heaviest sanctions ever placed on a single company in the US.In 2019, Trump signed into law the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act, which established criteria to identify communications services Washington deemed could pose a risk to national security.The FCC’s latest move reflects a bipartisan consensus in Washington to treat foreign drone technology as an “unacceptable risk” to national infrastructure.

Anthea Hartig, director of the National Museum of American History, appears in front of the House DOGE subcommittee on Capitol Hill on Tuesday. Andrew Harnik/Getty Images hide caption toggle caption Andrew Harnik/Getty Images In a subcommittee hearing Tuesday, House Republicans sharply questioned the director of the National Museum of American History, Anthea Hartig. The GOP lawmakers' comments closely mirrored Trump administration's criticisms of the institution she leads as insufficiently patriotic. The hearing was held by the House's Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency, a branch of DOGE that is chaired by Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn). In his opening remarks, Burchett said: "I feel like [the Smithsonian]'s become infected by a woke ideology that seeped into public displays, educational materials and planning documents. The American story is the birth and growth of a great nation founded on powerful ideals and which we aim to fully achieve. But in the museum's current telling, history is just an ongoing power struggle between oppressors and the oppressed." In a 162-page report issued on July 4, the White House Domestic Policy Council accused the Smithsonian museum of being "subject to institutional capture by a radical, activist ideology that is fundamentally opposed to telling the noble, honest story of the great country we know and love." The council faulted the National Museum of American History on a multitude of fronts, saying it underemphasized the Founding Fathers and early colonial and Revolutionary history; was not sufficiently celebratory of the country's 250th anniversary; and that it engaged in "anti-white," "illegal alien" and transgender activism. It also accused the museum of trying to "indoctrinate" teachers and students through its exhibitions, programming and teaching resources. Nearly in tandem with the hearing on Tuesday, House Democrats issued a 16-page rebuttal to the White House's report, which accuses the Trump administration of trying to undermine the trustworthiness of museums and museum scholars in general, and argues that it is part of a larger "effort to control and contort the historical record." Citing recent public opinion surveys, the Democrats write: "Museums regularly rank among the top three most trusted institutions in the country, trailing only friends and family. The White House asks the public to believe the institutions Americans trust most are the ones peddling radical ideology on the word of President Donald Trump." The hearing itself unspooled on strict partisan lines. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) questioned Hartig about an exhibition called "Girlhood," which included mentions of gender identity and puberty. Mace asked, "When was your gender revealed to you, Dr. Hartig?" At another point, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) asked Hartig, "You intend to use a taxpayer-funded national museum to push a racial narrative that divides Americans by their skin color and guilt?" Hartig, who kept a cool tone throughout the hearing, eventually replied: "So the Smithsonian is a nonpartisan institution we're very proud of." Many of the Democrats who spoke at the hearing linked the July 4 report to what they perceive as broader GOP attacks on museums, the arts and education. Rep Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.) spoke about another Smithsonian institution, the National Museum of African American History and Culture, saying: "I'm here as a Black man who grew up in segregation … We will not let you destroy that museum, no matter how long it takes, how many battles are required, how much effort is needed. We will not allow that to happen unless you find a way to kill all of us and walk over our bodies to change history. That history is too sacred, it is too precious, and it will not be erased." Neither the Smithsonian nor Rep. Burchett's office replied immediately to NPR's requests for comment regarding Tuesday's hearing. According to the Smithsonian's charter, all of its 21 museums, 14 educat

Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett testify before the House Appropriations Committee on Capitol Hill on July 14, 2026 in Washington, D.C. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images hide caption toggle caption Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images The Supreme Court did something Tuesday that it has not done in seven years. It sent two of the justices to Capitol Hill to testify about the court's budget request for the coming year. The budget has grown dramatically in recent years because of the equally dramatic rise in the number and intensity of threats to the justices' safety. Designated as the court's representatives were Justice Elena Kagan, appointed by President Obama, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, appointed by President Trump. As Kagan pointed out in her testimony, it was Republican Darrell Issa and Democrat Elijah Cummings who insisted that the court beef up its security ten years ago after Justice Antonin Scalia died in his sleep on a hunting trip, with no security anywhere nearby to respond quickly. "They said, kind of like, we think you're crazy, you know, that that you have less security than director of the Office of Personnel Management does," she recounted the Congressmen as telling the Court, "and we think that you have to do better." Before that, the justices basically had little to no security. They drove their own cars to work; went to the movies and shopped at supermarkets unaccompanied, and did their private travel on their own. And frankly, they liked it that way, because having security is personally invasive. In recent years, however, the court has undertaken major changes, including continually expanding the court police force to protect the justices and their homes at all times, and funding additional cybersecurity measures. And yet, as Justice Kagan pointed out, the Court's $207 million budget request is less than one tenth of one percent of the entire federal budget. The justices spoke at length Tuesday about how rising threats impacted their lives. Justice Barrett came prepared with two harrowing stories. First was the day she brought home a bullet-proof vest. "My 12-year-old son was standing in the doorway of my bedroom and he wanted to know what it was," she testified, "and I didn't know how to respond. I didn't expect that performing this service was going to put me in the position of explaining to my children what a bulletproof vest was and why I had to wear one." She also described how just six weeks ago, her house was swatted, with local police responding to a fake emergency call. Local police could have stormed her home, but for the fact that her own security detail was there to prevent it. Indeed, threats have deeply affected judges across America. After U.S. District Court Judge Esther Salas's 20-year old son was murdered by a gunman seeking to kill her, many federal judges have reported receiving packages bearing the name of her slain son. Those threats, Justice Barrett testified, "are meant to intimidate and they're meant to harass." Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), asked questions about President Trump's furious response to adverse rulings in the tariff and birthright citizenship cases, and whether Trump's heaping insults on the court could play a role in jeopardizing the safety of some justices. Kagan had a two-part reply. "Criticism is fair game. I mean, go for it. You know, life in the big city is that you're subject to all kinds of criticism. But intimidation is a different thing entirely. And when political figures of any stripe are trying to intimidate judges," she said, "that's where we really have crossed the line." The hearings were not confined to issues of safety. Congresswoman Rosa De Lauro (D-Conn.) asked about the Supreme Court's ethics requirements, noting that members of Congress and the executive branch are limited to gifts under $50, while the Supreme Court has no such limit. She is supporting a bill that would impose upon the Supreme Court the same restrict

Eventually she broke with her father entirely in 2015, expelling him from the party over his views on the Holocaust.Three years later, she rebranded the party Rassemblement National - National Rally (RN) - and although she was twice defeated by Emmanuel Macron for the presidency, in 2024 she steered RN to its best-ever election performance, with a hard-right alliance of 143 seats in the 577-seat National Assembly.She has painted herself as a victim of French justice, singled out for a "difference in treatment" from other leaders whose parties were found guilty of fraud.But the judges in the original trial found she had "authoritatively and with determination embraced the system established by her father", and that she was "at the heart" of the fake-jobs scheme.What are the possible verdicts?Acquittal: If Le Pen is acquitted, she will be clear to run for the presidency with her reputation intact. This verdict is seen as unlikely.Guilty: If the court finds her guilty and bars her from office for more than two years (from 31 March 2025), she will not be able to stand. That is because the clock has continued ticking since the five-year ban on public office was handed down.Guilty with reduced ban: It would be a different story if she were handed a ban on public office of two years or less as she would then be free to run.Guilty with electronic tag: If the court follows the recommendation of prosecutors and the four-year jail term remains, she would face one year with an electronic tag, rather than two, with the rest suspended. That is why she has set out her s

Then-acting Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Todd Lyons testifies during a House Homeland Security Committee hearing on February 10, 2026 in Washington, DC. Samuel Corum/Getty Images North America hide caption toggle caption Samuel Corum/Getty Images North America Todd Lyons, who led U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement during some of the most volatile moments this year, has been hired by a defense contractor to help "on U.S. homeland defense strategy, interagency operations, and international security." In confirming the move, Navigators Security and Defense told NPR that it does not engage in lobbying activities, and that Lyons cannot engage with the Department of Homeland Security for a year due to federal laws. It said Lyons is the company's new senior vice president for U.S. homeland security and international affairs. Lyons did not respond to NPR's multiple requests for comment. Navigators Security and Defense is a subsidiary of Navigators Global, a lobbying firm with clients including General Motors, the New York Jets, and GEO Group, a private prison contractor running immigration detention centers across the country, including Delaney Hall Detention Center in Newark, N.J. "Lyons brings more than three decades of law enforcement leadership and military expertise in support of Navigators Security and Defense clientele," the company said. Navigators Global has represented NPR and the NPR Network to Congress since 2011. Leading ICE through tumultuous times Lyons served as ICE's acting director from March 2025 to May 2026. During his tenure, ICE agents were tasked with carrying out some of the Trump administration's most aggressive immigration enforcement operations, including big, made-for-TV crackdowns in Chicago and Minneapolis. Lyons faced intense pressure to meet a 3,000-person daily arrest quota imposed by the White House. Despite the agency's aggressive tactics to accomplish this — including arresting immigrants inside immigration courts — the quota was never met. Lyons stepped down last month. He was replaced by David Venturella, a veteran of ICE who most recently worked for GEO Group in multiple roles, including as senior vice president of client relations and, more recently, as a paid consultant. The GEO Group has seen a business boom as it cultivated close ties to the Trump administration. In 2025, GEO Group made $254 million in income — that's a 700% increase from 2024. In a news release issued last month celebrating GEO Group's 2026 first quarter results, Chairman George Zoley said 2025 "was the most successful period for new business wins in our Company's history."