United Airlines has a new rule on the books that has some travelers cheering: Listening to audio without headphones can now get passengers removed from a plane.
The airline already had a pro-headphone policy in place, but last week it updated its contract of carriage – the rules a passenger agrees to in order to fly – to specify that “passengers who fail to use headphones while listening to audio or video content” could be removed from a plane or not allowed to board.
“We’ve always encouraged customers to use headphones when listening to audio content – and our Wi-Fi rules already remind customers to use headphones,” United spokesman Josh Freed said in an email, adding that the carrier is expanding its high-speed Starlink connectivity. “It seemed like a good time to make that even clearer by adding it to the contract of carriage.”
Other airlines have their own policies encouraging or requiring headphones, though most do not come with the threat of enforcement.
Frontier Airlines includes the requirement in the carry-on baggage section of its contract, though it’s not clear what the penalty would be for ignoring the rule. Frontier did not respond to questions about enforcement. The airline says that portable electronic devices that make sounds “may be used only with headphones and provided the sound, even via the headphones, cannot be heard by others.”
On the entertainment section of its website, Delta Air Lines implores: “For the comfort of everyone around you, please use earbuds or headphones with any personal electronic device during your flight.”
Flight attendants also pass out free headphones to customers on most flights, the airline said.
“Customers are welcome to listen to audio or watch video on board, and we expect them to follow standard courtesy and flight crew instructions,” Delta spokeswoman Samantha Moore Facteau said in an email.
Southwest Airlines doesn’t mention headphones specifically in its contract, but notes on its website that they are required when passengers listen to audio.
“Our contract does include passengers not adhering to crew member instructions, including those about use of personal electronic devices,” spokesman Chris Perry said in an email. “Thus, a passenger would be expected to adhere to instructions about headphones.”
In 2023, an American Airlines pilot delivered a lecture from the front of the plane that went viral on social media, urging passengers to show respect for each other.
“The social experiment on listening to videos on speaker mode and talking on a cellphone on speaker mode, that is over – over and done in this country,” he said. “Nobody wants to hear your video. … Use your AirPods, use your headphones, whatever it is. That’s your business.”
Travel blogger Ben Schlappig, founder of One Mile at a Time, welcomed the news that United was treating the noise issue more seriously. The Miami resident said fellow travelers in his area are terrible sound scofflaws.
“It drives me absolutely bonkers,” he said. “Of all the things in the airline industry, this is probably what I’m most passionate about, which is quite sad. I just find myself in disbelief at the lack of respect they have for others that they’re just willing to blast whatever they’re listening to.”
Schlappig wondered how United would enforce the rule, but said just having it in place is a good move.
“The spirit of this is fantastic,” he said.
(c) 2026, The Washington Post · Hannah Sampson
A federal planning commission on Thursday delayed a vote on President Donald Trump’s planned White House ballroom until next month, citing “significant public input,” including tens of thousands of comments – nearly all of them critical of the project.
The National Capital Planning Commission had planned to review the proposal and vote on it – the final procedural hurdle for an effort to dramatically remake one of the most revered symbols of American power and democracy.
But partway into the meeting, commission Chair Will Scharf said that he expects public comment to last five to nine hours, with over 100 people signed up to testify, which will likely require the board to recess Thursday evening and resume Friday morning. The commission will discuss and vote on the project at its April 2 meeting, he said.
Ahead of Thursday’s hearing, the agency received more than 35,000 comments about the project, according to a Washington Post analysis of submissions posted on the commission’s website. The “vast majority” came from those who oppose the plan, commission staff said. The Washington Post found that more than 97 percent of comments were critical of the president’s plans.
The delayed vote is a snag in Trump’s push to rush the project through the approval process so construction can be completed before the end of his second term. Securing approval at the commission’s next meeting, however, could keep the project on schedule; the White House has said it plans to begin aboveground construction as soon as next month.
The commission’s endorsement would be the last bureaucratic obstacle in the Trump administration’s push to secure approval for the $400 million ballroom from two federal committees charged by Congress with reviewing the designs of major construction projects in Washington. Late last year, the White House laid out a strategy to complete the process within nine weeks, a plan that’s now been pushed to just over three months.
Historic preservationists have sued to stop the project, and a federal judge is considering their challenge, which alleges that Trump is unlawfully pursuing a project that requires express authorization from Congress.
Last week, the National Capital Planning Commission’s executive director, Marcel Acosta, recommended that the 12-member panel approve the project. In an 11-page report published Friday, Acosta said the proposed structure will provide presidents with a larger permanent event space while protecting “the historic integrity and cultural landscape of the White House.”
Acosta’s assessment contrasts sharply with the public response. Tens of thousands of comments criticized what opponents described as a rushed approval process, insufficient public input and a design that would overshadow the main White House building.
The president has made the building a priority of his second term, and he returns to it often in public remarks and social media posts. He clashed with the project’s previous lead architect about the size of the addition.
Trump has made strategic moves to secure its success, including reshaping the membership of the two federal bodies that must sign off on the project: the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts. Last month, the Commission of Fine Arts, which now includes Trump’s 26-year-old executive assistant, voted unanimously to approve the project. Chair Rodney Mims Cook Jr. called it a “desperately needed” and “very beautiful structure,” whose design he credited to Trump.
The National Capital Planning Commission is led by Will Scharf, the White House staff secretary and Trump’s former personal lawyer, whom the president appointed in July. The commission includes a pair of other White House officials, James Blair and Stuart Levenbach. It also has nine seats apportioned to sitting Cabinet secretaries and other officials who have a role in overseeing Washington, although senior officials and lawmakers usually send a representative in lieu of attending themselves.
Although federal design commissions have traditionally acted as a constraint on government construction projects – often holding extended deliberations that last for years – Trump has pressed to move the project along swiftly so it can wrap before his term concludes.
Last year, the president ordered the rapid demolition of the East Wing annex without first seeking authorization from Congress or the review committees. Trump’s plan for a new ballroom building on the site that matches the “height and scale” of the main White House has advanced despite objections from a federal judge, architecture experts and historic preservationists, who argue that the structure would be too big, dwarfing a centuries-old American symbol.
White House officials want the commission to approve in one fell swoop the ballroom building’s preliminary and final plans, which the body normally takes up individually at separate meetings, giving agency planners time to incorporate commission feedback before resubmitting updated plans. For example, the planning commission approved a new White House perimeter fence in three steps over seven months, starting with a conceptual design in July 2016 and ending with final plans in February 2017.
Last week, Trump scored another victory on the ballroom front. U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon ruled that construction on the project could proceed, citing procedural problems with a lawsuit challenging the president’s ability to unilaterally build the structure. The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a congressionally chartered organization that advocates for protecting historic sites, amended and refiled its complaint Sunday, three days after Leon’s ruling.
Trump has repeatedly defended the project’s $400 million price tag, saying it is a benefit to taxpayers that the project will be paid for with private donations.
“I built many a ballroom. I believe it’s going to be the most beautiful ballroom anywhere in the world,” Trump said Monday at a ceremony in which he awarded the Medal of Honor to three Army soldiers.
Democrats and government watchdog organizations have raised concerns about those donors, which include major corporations such as Amazon, Google and Palantir – companies that together have billions of dollars in federal contracts. Critics have questioned whether donors could receive special access or other benefits in return. (Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.) Some Democrats say improvements to the White House complex may be warranted but contend that the ballroom should be far smaller and subject to congressional oversight to ensure transparency.
Polls have found that most Americans oppose the project. Twenty-five percent of respondents said they supported tearing down the East Wing to build the ballroom, compared with 58 percent who opposed doing so, according to an Economist/YouGov poll conducted last month.
(c) 2026, The Washington Post · Jonathan Edwards, Dan Diamond
A coalition of Democratic-led states sued President Donald Trump on Thursday in the U.S. Court of International Trade, arguing that his newly imposed across-the-board tariffs are illegal.
The suit is led by the Democratic attorneys general from Oregon, New York, California and Arizona along with attorneys general from 18 other states.
They accused Trump of trying to “sidestep” a February Supreme Court ruling that overturned many of his tariffs by using a different statute, Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, as justification for new tariffs.
“The President is attempting to use an obscure law as a tool for his tariffs, and is yet again, going about it illegally,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement.
Section 122 gives the president the power to temporarily restrict imports to the United States to deal with “fundamental international payments problems.” Several prominent economists criticized Trump’s use of Section 122 when he introduced new tariffs in late February, suggesting that a trade deficit with another nation, Trump’s nominal reason for the tariffs, did not amount to a “payments problem.” During court case against Trump’s earlier tariffs, the Justice Department told an appeals court that Section 122 was not relevant.
White House spokesman Kush Desai said the Trump administration “will vigorously defend the president’s action in court,” and said Trump used “his authority granted by Congress to address fundamental international payments problems and to deal with our country’s large and serious balance-of-payments deficits.”
Trump turned to Section 122 after the Supreme Court struck down his original slate of widespread tariffs under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act. In a 6-3 ruling, the court determined there was nothing in the 1977 law to authorize Trump’s tariffs.
When first announced, the Section 122 tariffs, which have a 150-day limit, were set at 10 percent. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Wednesday that they will increase to 15 percent “sometime this week.”
(c) 2026, The Washington Post · Alec Dent
A Democratic senator viewed as a potential 2028 presidential candidate will unveil a plan that he says would ensure roughly half of all U.S. workers pay no federal income taxes, according to details shared with The Washington Post.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland is expected to release the measure next week as Democratic lawmakers search for a sharp economic message to counter last year’s Republican tax law.
Under Van Hollen’s proposal, workers making at or below a “living wage” – $46,000 for taxpayers filing individually, or $92,000 for married couples filing jointly – would not have to pay federal income taxes. Tens of millions of additional middle-class workers would also receive a tax cut under the proposal, but they would still have to pay taxes. The measure would be paid for by a new surcharge on millionaires that would raise roughly $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years.
Fifteen Senate Democrats are co-sponsoring Van Hollen’s proposal, though it has no chance of passing in a Republican-controlled Congress. The number of tax filers with no federal income tax would increase from 37 million under current law to 66 million under Van Hollen’s proposal, according to Steve Wamhoff, director of federal tax policy at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a left-leaning think tank.
“This bill, in addition to being the right policy, sends a very strong message that we stand for working people who are sweating every day to make ends meet. That’s a group of Americans that Donald Trump somehow appealed to,” the senator said in an interview.
Though the 2028 presidential primaries have not yet begun, Van Hollen’s proposal reflects the early jockeying around the ideas the party should run on. The 2020 Democratic presidential primary, the party’s last open nominating contest, featured a rush to the left as candidates raced to embrace far-reaching ideas including Medicare-for-all, the Green New Deal and aggressive taxes on billionaires.
This week, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-California) introduced legislation to enact a $4.4 trillion wealth tax on the United States’ approximately 1,000 billionaires to fund a Medicare expansion, universal child care and other social initiatives. Sanders’s plan calls for major growth in federal programs that would make the U.S. government more akin to the Scandinavian countries of Norway and Sweden.
Van Hollen said he supports Sanders’s wealth tax proposal and views his plan as a complementary measure that addresses a different problem. While he believes that Democrats should tax billionaire wealth and reverse the GOP’s Medicaid cuts, Van Hollen emphasized that the party also needs a response to Trump’s “no tax on tips” and “no tax on overtime” policies, which have proved popular with workers.
“This is not intended to be the overall comprehensive plan for Democrats. It’s supposed to be an important plank in the platform,” Van Hollen said. “These are not at all mutually exclusive. They’re reinforcing.”
In practice, though, Democrats would have to pick between competing policy priorities should they take control of Congress and the White House in 2028. The last time they controlled both, the party’s sprawling wish list and razor-thin congressional margins contributed to a dysfunctional months-long negotiation that culminated in the defeat of President Joe Biden’s “Build Back Better” agenda. Neither Sanders nor Van Hollen calls for using new revenue from their taxes to reduce the federal deficit, which is close to $2 trillion annually, and then there’s a long and expensive to-do list that ranges from universal child care to free public colleges and universities.
Still, Van Hollen emphasized that voters want policies that go beyond new government social programs. He cited research suggesting that Trump’s line on “no tax on tips” was the best-testing message of his State of the Union address. At the barbershop he has frequented for the past two decades – a Hair Cuttery in Kensington, Maryland – his barber pulled out her phone to show him how much she was benefiting from Trump’s tips policy, Van Hollen said.
“This is an even better proposal that provides more and permanent tax relief,” Van Hollen said of his plan, adding that it applies to everyone in the same income bracket, rather than just those paid in tips.
Overall, Van Hollen’s plan would reduce taxes for nearly 130 million people, according to an analysis by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a left-leaning think tank. The average single person making $50,000 would see a reduction of about $2,800. The average family of four earning $95,000 would save roughly $6,000. The “living wage” below which nobody would pay taxes is defined by a Massachusetts Institute of Technology index and would rise with inflation under Van Hollen’s proposal.
Van Hollen’s millionaire surtax would levy new rates above existing taxes on the rich. It would charge an additional 5 percent on income above $1 million, 10 percent above $2 million and 12 percent above $5 million. The Yale Budget Lab has estimated the surtax would affect about 615,000 filers. Van Hollen’s plan would not raise as much as Sanders’s, but Van Hollen’s is less likely to face constitutional challenges, as experts have long debated the legality of a national wealth tax.
(c) 2026, The Washington Post · Jeff Stein
An El Al aircraft that was moments away from touching down at Ben Gurion Airport early Thursday morning had to abort its landing and climb back to cruising altitude after a missile was launched from Iran.
Authorities said that despite the disruption, air traffic into Israel continues under tight conditions. A total of 17 flights are scheduled to arrive at Ben Gurion Airport on Thursday, and preparations are already underway to expand flight operations beginning tomorrow. Officials say the plan is to double the number of incoming flights in order to bring home as many Israelis as possible who are currently stranded abroad.
According to a report by Channel 12 News, a special framework for outbound flights will take effect starting Sunday. Under the new system, only one departing flight will be permitted each hour, and each aircraft will be limited to 50 passengers.
Passengers leaving Israel will face additional restrictions under the arrangement. Travelers will not be allowed to check baggage, must complete check-in procedures ahead of time, and will be required to arrive at Ben Gurion Airport approximately an hour and a half before departure.
The report also noted that individuals accompanying travelers will not be permitted to enter the terminal. Outgoing flights will operate based on aircraft arriving in Israel as part of the ongoing rescue flight effort.
Sharon Kedmi, director general of the Israel Airports Authority, said during a press conference that the airport system currently has the capacity to handle between 8,000 and 9,000 passengers on a typical business day.
Kedmi added that, based on the current operating plan, authorities believe all Israelis who want to return home should be able to do so within seven to ten days.
{Matzav.com}
IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir said Thursday evening that Israel still has additional unexpected actions prepared as its military campaign against Iran continues to expand.
In his first public remarks since the launch of Operation Roaring Lion, Zamir indicated that the campaign is entering a new phase following the initial wave of attacks that established Israeli air superiority and significantly weakened Iran’s missile capabilities.
“After completing the phase of the surprise opening blow, in which we established air superiority and suppressed the ballistic missile array, we are moving to the next stage of the campaign, in which we will intensify the strike against the foundations of the regime and its military capabilities. We have additional surprise moves, which I do not intend to reveal. We will pursue our enemies, all of them, and reach them,” Zamir declared.
Opening his statement, the IDF chief reviewed the progress of the operation, which began less than a week ago.
“Less than a week ago, we launched Operation ‘Roaring Lion.’ For six days now, we have been striking the Iranian terror regime without pause. The operation was planned in secrecy by thousands of soldiers from various branches across the Israel Defense Forces and in close cooperation with our ally, the United States. The operation is proceeding at the pace we set in advance.”
Zamir said the opening strike, carried out early Saturday morning, dealt a devastating blow to Iran’s leadership.
“in the surprise opening strike carried out on Saturday morning, dozens of munitions were dropped on three targets. In just 40 seconds, about 40 senior figures of the Iranian terror regime were eliminated, headed by the regime’s leader, Ali Khamenei. His life’s goal was to destroy the State of Israel, and he even planned a detailed program to achieve that.”
He added that the Israeli Air Force has carried out thousands of additional attacks since the campaign began.
“Israeli Air Force pilots have so far carried out 2,500 strikes and dropped more than 6,000 munitions. Within 24 hours, our pilots paved the way to Tehran. We destroyed about 80 percent of the air defense systems and achieved near-complete air superiority over Iranian skies. Thanks to that, and to high-quality intelligence, we are striking the ballistic missiles that pose a direct threat to Israeli civilians. We have neutralized and destroyed more than 60 percent of the ballistic missile launchers-a very significant achievement that reduces the damage to the home front and saves many lives. This is an ongoing effort, but I emphasize: the threat has not yet been removed-every missile is lethal and poses a danger.”
Zamir also addressed the escalation along Israel’s northern border, where Hezbollah has entered the conflict.
“Hezbollah made a strategic mistake and, contrary to the interests of the citizens of Lebanon, chose to join the campaign-it is paying a heavy price for that. We are striking forcefully, both on the front and deep inside Lebanon. I ordered IDF forces to move forward and deepen the line of control along the border while positioning themselves at key points in southern Lebanon. Tonight we eliminated the head of Hezbollah’s fire array. He was known by the nickname Fidaa. Fidaa was responsible for the deaths of many Israelis and personally commanded the anti-tank missile fire in which Yochai Kalangel and Dor Haim Nini were killed.”
Concluding his remarks, Zamir said Israel will continue its efforts until the threat from Hezbollah is removed.
“There will be no more equations. We will continue to act to protect the security of the residents of the north. We will operate relentlessly to remove the threat, and we will not relent from the goal of disarming Hezbollah,” Zamir concluded.
{Matzav.com}
Israeli Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon today (Thursday) presented outside the Security Council chamber parts of an Iranian Shahed-136 attack drone, which was used in Iranian attacks in the region.
Ambassador Danon stated: “This is not a prop, this is an Iranian terrorist weapon. Now imagine if this came to your home, your living room, your children’s room. This is the terrorism we are dealing with.”
Danon said that Iran’s missile and drone capabilities are being degraded while Israel vows to dismantle Tehran’s terror network and nuclear ambitions.
WATCH:
{Matzav.com}
