Feed aggregator

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has placed a hold on the Trump administration’s proposed $2.8 billion munitions sale to Israel, joining House Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York in withholding support for the transaction. Semafor reported that Shaheen’s hold has been in place since July.

Shaheen has raised concerns about the Israeli government’s military actions in Gaza and Syria, as well as violence by extremist Israeli settlers against Palestinians in the West Bank. According to Semafor, she has also sought information from the Trump administration about how Israel intends to use the weapons included in the proposed package.

The $2.8 billion package includes 40,000 2,000-pound bombs — 20,000 MK-84 bombs and 20,000 BLU-117 bombs, according to Reuters. The Biden administration had previously withheld a shipment of some 2,000-pound bombs to Israel because of concerns about their potential use in densely populated areas of Gaza.

Palestinian health authorities currently say that more than 73,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since the war began following the Hamas-led attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Those figures do not distinguish between civilians and combatants. Israel says its military operations are directed against Hamas and other terrorist groups and has accused Hamas of operating among civilians.

Because Shaheen is the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, her objection can delay the informal congressional review that generally precedes major U.S. weapons sales. Such holds are not themselves a binding legal prohibition on an administration proceeding with a sale, but the State Department traditionally attempts to address concerns raised by the senior lawmakers overseeing foreign affairs before formally notifying Congress.

Semafor first disclosed Shaheen’s hold, reporting that it has been in effect since July. Her move became public shortly after Meeks announced his own opposition to advancing the same package through the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Meeks said his concerns centered on whether the Netanyahu government would use the American-supplied weapons in compliance with U.S. law and international humanitarian law. His objection alone does not legally prevent the administration from proceeding with the sale.

Asked by CNN on Wednesday about Meeks’s decision, Shaheen said, “all of us share concern about what Israel is doing.”

“What they’re doing in Gaza, they’re bombing in places like Syria and what that means for any peaceful solution in the Middle East,” she said.

Shaheen then expanded on her objections to the policies of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, particularly in the West Bank.

“Netanyahu needs to hear from America that we don’t like what he’s doing. We don’t like what’s happening in the West Bank where settler violence is killing Palestinians, sending them out of their homes, disrupting basic infrastructure. And the Netanyahu administration has basically done nothing to address that,” Shaheen continued.

The holds by Shaheen and Meeks amount to opposition from the ranking Democrats on both congressional committees that review major foreign arms sales. The administration could nevertheless attempt to move the transaction forward despite those objections; Semafor noted that congressional holds during the informal review process are customary rather than legally binding.

The proposed sale comes amid continuing debate in Congress over U.S. military assistance to Israel. In April, 40 members of the Senate Democratic caucus voted to block a separate arms sale to Israel, reflecting increased opposition among Democratic lawmakers to some weapons transfers.

The Trump administration, meanwhile, has continued to support substantial military assistance and weapons sales to Israel. Reuters reported that the current package was informally presented to the congressional committees responsible for reviewing major arms transactions before any formal notification of the sale.

Neither the State Department nor the Israeli Embassy immediately responded to Reuters’ requests for comment when details of the proposed $2.8 billion package emerged earlier this week.

For now, the package remains caught in the congressional review process, with the senior Democrats on both the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee seeking additional assurances about how the weapons would be used before giving their approval.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump’s planned Triumphal Arch in Washington, D.C., has cleared a key aviation review, with the Federal Aviation Administration determining that the towering monument would not endanger aircraft — provided that an “eternal flame” and extensive lighting are installed to ensure pilots can see it.

“The FAA’s determination includes conditions for the Arch to be appropriately marked with a non-standard eternal flame on top of the structure and floodlight projectors pointed towards the Arch to make it noticeable for pilots,” an FAA spokesperson told The Hill.

The agency issued its hazard determination Friday following an examination by FAA safety specialists. The review considered “airspace, air traffic patterns and procedures around Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, as well as operations at nearby military/public-use airports,” before concluding that the proposed structure “would not pose a hazard to aircraft.”

The lighting requirements represent a change from an earlier FAA recommendation. The agency had previously indicated that the arch would need conventional red obstruction lights, similar to those used atop the Washington Monument, but those lights are no longer required under the newly released determination. Instead, the eternal flame and floodlighting would serve to make the structure visible to pilots.

The FAA provided additional specifications in correspondence with the National Park Service, stating that the searchlight projectors accompanying the flame should “provide an average illumination of at least 15 foot-candles (161.46 lux) over the top one-third of the structure.”

Trump’s proposed arch is expected to rise approximately 250 feet, which would make it substantially taller than Paris’ Arc de Triomphe, which stands roughly 164 feet high, as well as Mexico City’s Monumento a la Revolución, which reaches approximately 220 feet.

The monument is planned for Memorial Circle on Columbia Island, between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery. The site lies along the Arlington Memorial Bridge corridor, whose historic design was intended to symbolize the reunification of the North and South following the Civil War.

The proposal has also generated opposition. A veterans organization launched a campaign against the project last week, arguing that placing the enormous structure between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery would interfere with an important historic and symbolic sightline.

The group argued that it was “entirely inappropriate and borders on sacrilege to the men and women buried” at Arlington National Cemetery to disrupt the visual connection between the cemetery and the Lincoln Memorial.

The National Park Service has separately concluded that the project could adversely affect numerous historic properties and landscapes in the Washington area, particularly through changes to established views and sightlines.

Its review identified nearly 40 historic locations that could potentially be affected by the project, including the Pentagon, Washington Monument, U.S. Capitol, National Mall, Lincoln Memorial, Robert E. Lee Memorial and Lyndon B. Johnson Memorial Grove.

Despite those concerns, the FAA’s latest determination removes a significant aviation-related obstacle facing the project. The proposed arch would stand close to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and near heavily traveled flight paths, prompting questions from aviation experts and lawmakers about whether such a tall structure could complicate operations in Washington’s already tightly controlled airspace.

The FAA has now concluded that the arch can coexist with those aviation operations — as long as the required visibility measures are incorporated into the final design. Under the agency’s determination, that means Trump’s planned monument will not simply be illuminated at night: its enormous upper section will be continuously floodlit, with the distinctive eternal flame burning at its summit to make the structure readily identifiable to pilots.

{Matzav.com}

[COMMUNICATED]

Maamad Hashava TODAY EREV YOM KIPPUR AT 3PM

Forgotten Debt?* Damaged A Car? *Return An Item??

Keren Neki Kapayim is an innovative halachic solution developed by Gedolei Haposkim for the return of unknown debts and misplaced assets.
Join the thousands who have come clean and your Tefillos will soar this Yom Kippur.

As upstanding, committed Shomrei Torah Umitzvos, our life is all about observing the dictates of Torah and halacha to the utmost of our abilities. Obviously, we each have our shortcomings in different areas, and for this reason the Torah gives us the opportunity of Teshuva – to come clean and make good on our failings. There is one area though, for which the ordinary process of Teshuva, do not suffice to clear us of our misdeeds – that is the real of bein odom l’chaveiro – sins between man and fellow man. When it’s simply a question of a personal offense – one has to ask for forgiveness. If it’s a monetary obligation the debt must be paid up.

But what happens when we don’t even know to whom we owe whom to pay?

This is indeed a dilemma!

Are our hands completely clean?

Is there anything in our hands or in our possession that’s not 100% our own?

Perhaps, we don’t know who the owner is, but does that make it ours?

The thought is frightening!

Click HERE to join the Neki Kapayim annual Maamad Hashava!

Can we stand before Hashem pleading for mercy; asking for brachos for ourselves and our loved ones, when our hands are sullied by money that’s not ours?
The Gemara (Beitza 29a, Bava Kamma 94b) discusses the issue of returning unknown debt. Click here for halachic overview

The solution developed by the dayanim of Keren Neki Kapayim is a new and innovative idea to achieve a complete and immediate return to the true owner of the money, whoever and wherever he might me

President Donald Trump is proposing a new name for artificial intelligence, arguing that the term used to describe the rapidly advancing technology is both inaccurate and inelegant. On Saturday, the President posted a poll on Truth Social offering followers three possible replacements for “AI.”

Trump’s three choices were “Superior Intelligence,” “Extreme Intelligence” and “Supreme Intelligence.” He invited users to select their preferred option for what he described as an expanding technological revolution.

“Many people think that the words ‘Artificial Intelligence’ are inaccurate, and very ineloquent, relative to AI, or Artificial Intelligence,” he wrote.

Trump said his suggested alternatives are a “far more elegant and accurate description of this new phenomena.”

By 12:45 p.m. Saturday, more than 27,000 Truth Social users had participated in the poll, according to The Hill.

The President’s unusual proposal comes amid an increasingly intense debate over the future of artificial intelligence, including disagreements over whether the rapidly developing technology needs additional government safeguards. Several technology executives have recently urged the industry to slow the development of increasingly powerful AI systems, while Trump has generally opposed efforts that he believes could impede American AI development.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei and Elon Musk have all recently expressed support for slowing or more carefully pacing the development of increasingly capable AI models. Their concerns have centered on whether safety measures and oversight can keep pace with rapidly improving systems.

At the same time, some Republican lawmakers have pursued measures addressing particular concerns surrounding AI and the infrastructure needed to support it, including data privacy, surveillance technology and the rapidly growing number of data centers.

Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Jon Husted of Ohio both advanced efforts during the past week dealing with aspects of the expanding technology. Husted has pushed legislation aimed at preventing ordinary utility customers from being saddled with infrastructure costs generated by large data centers.

Hawley, meanwhile, invited executives from companies that manufacture AI-powered license-plate-reading systems, including Flock Safety, to appear before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism as part of an inquiry into the technology.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has taken a position that combines some regulation with industry self-policing. Speaking to reporters Sunday, Johnson said, “Obviously, there’s a need for guardrails, but there’s also a keen need for the industry to self-regulate and self-monitor and report to us.”

The debate intensified after Amodei published an essay calling for companies developing the most advanced AI models to deliberately moderate the pace at which their capabilities increase, arguing that additional time is necessary to develop appropriate safeguards.

“We must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of AI models,” Amodei wrote in a blog post. “Progress will still seem fast, and we must make wise use of the time we gain.”

Trump’s idea of replacing the term “artificial intelligence” is not entirely new. He previously suggested “supreme intelligence” as an alternative in late 2025, though he indicated at the time that technology industry leaders would ultimately determine what terminology to use.

The President has increasingly made artificial intelligence a major focus of his administration’s economic and technology policy. He has also developed relationships with prominent technology executives, several of whom are expected to attend a White House state dinner during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s upcoming visit to Washington.

Trump has repeatedly described artificial intelligence as an enormous economic opportunity for the United States and has resisted calls for restrictions that he says could weaken the country’s position relative to China. He recently described AI technology as “the Greatest Economic Development Engine in History,” arguing that its potential economic impact exceeds that of traditional commodities such as oil, gold and diamonds.

In a September 14 social-media post, Trump went further, dismissing calls for additional AI regulation and arguing that strong presidential oversight was sufficient to address potential dangers associated with the technology.

“The only control or ‘guardrails’ that AI needs is a STRONG AND SMART (High IQ!) PRESIDENT, and the U.S.A. has that, in spades!” the president wrote.

Trump has since expanded his AI proposals further, announcing plans for an “AI Force” and saying he intends to name an AI “Czar,” as his administration seeks to accelerate American development of the technology while a growing number of industry figures and lawmakers debate what safeguards should accompany it.

{Matzav.com}

It is with great sadness that Matzav.com reports the petirah of Dr. Asher (Allan) Plaut z”l, the longtime pediatrician whose Kingston Avenue office in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, was a familiar address to generations of local families and who devoted more than four decades to caring for the community’s children.

Dr. Plaut was niftar on Shabbos following a short illness. He was 75.

Although he resided in Lawrence, New York, Dr. Plaut’s professional life was deeply intertwined with Crown Heights. His pediatric practice, located at 372 Kingston Avenue, became a fixture of the neighborhood, where parents brought their children for everything from routine examinations and childhood illnesses to the anxious moments that inevitably send a parent searching for a trusted doctor.

For many Crown Heights families, Dr. Plaut was not simply the pediatrician listed on an insurance card. He was the doctor they knew. Parents who had brought one child to him returned with the next, and as the years passed, his decades of practice meant that he cared for multiple generations of families throughout the community.

Dr. Plaut graduated from SUNY Downstate Medical Center in 1977 and went on to specialize in pediatrics. He was a board-certified pediatrician, with hospital affiliations that included Maimonides Medical Center and Long Island Jewish Medical Center. His medical career ultimately stretched for nearly half a century.

Day after day and year after year, he made the trip from his home in Lawrence to Kingston Avenue and continued serving a community that had come to depend upon him.

His commitment to Crown Heights did not go unnoticed. In 2018, Dr. Plaut received a Citation of Honor from New York State Senator Jesse Hamilton recognizing his exemplary service to the community.

But perhaps the greatest testimony to his work was something no citation could capture: the enormous number of children who passed through his office during more than four decades of practice.

There were the routine visits and annual checkups, the winter viruses and summer injuries, the worried telephone calls, the prescriptions, the referrals, and the countless questions from nervous parents. There were families who knew that when something was wrong with a child, Dr. Plaut’s Kingston Avenue office was where they turned.

The length of his tenure itself tells a remarkable story. A physician who remains in one neighborhood for more than 40 years does not merely accumulate patients; he becomes part of the community’s history. Children grow up, marry, and have children of their own, while the same familiar doctor remains behind the desk and in the examination room.

Dr. Plaut continued that avodas hakodesh of healing and helping others for decades, quietly carrying the responsibility that comes with being entrusted with the health of another person’s child.

Dr. Plaut is survived by his wife, Mrs. Dina Plaut, as well as his children and grandchildren, who continue the family he cherished.

The levayah is taking place this morning at Bais Medrash Ateres Yisroel, Rabbi Blumenkrantz’s shul, located at 8-27 Cornaga Avenue in Far Rockaway.

Kevurah will follow at King Solomon Memorial Park in Clifton, New Jersey.

Yehi zichro baruch.

On this eve of Yom Kippur, we at Matzav.com would like to wish you and your families a gemar chasimah tovah. We hope and pray that this year will be one of great yeshuos for all of Klal Yisroel and that we will merit the geulah during this year, 5787.

At the same time, we pray that Hakadosh Boruch Hu continue to watch over us and protect us from the unspeakable dangers that lurk across the world. And we pray as well that the thousands of Yiddishe neshamos who are so far away from the Torah path find the light and draw closer to their heritage and the One Above.

We wish you all a meaningful fast and that all your tefillos will be accepted On High, letovah.

Once again, a gemar chasimah tovah to you and yours.

Sincerely,

The Matzav.com  staff

FBI Director Kash Patel said yesterday that the bureau has used artificial intelligence to help prevent potential school shootings in North Carolina and roughly half a dozen other states, while dramatically expanding its use of AI since he took charge of the agency. Patel said the FBI’s use of the technology has increased by 605 percent during his tenure.

During an appearance on Fox News’ “Saturday in America,” host Kayleigh McEnany asked Patel about an earlier statement in which he said the FBI had used AI software to rapidly evaluate a tip concerning a potential school shooting in North Carolina.

Patel said Saturday that the North Carolina case was not an isolated example and that the bureau has used similar technology in several other states.

“We’ve done it in North Carolina and about half a dozen other states to prevent school shootings since I’ve been in the seat,” the FBI director told McEnany. “AI, when used lawfully, is a critical tool to triage data. For far too long the institutional morass in D.C. rejected the advancements of technology.”

Patel said the FBI has moved aggressively to incorporate artificial intelligence into its operations and intends to further expand the technology’s role in evaluating potential threats.

“I have increased the use of AI in the FBI by 605 percent,” Patel continued. “And what we’re about to do is work with our **… **partners and look at databases and collect information and get DNA and then get these threats back out to the field and stop people from killing children at schools.”

Patel also said the FBI is working with private-sector technology companies as well as state and local law enforcement agencies as part of the initiative. His 605 percent figure was also cited during his Senate Judiciary Committee appearance earlier in the week, when he was questioned about the bureau’s modernization efforts.

The FBI director said his decision to expand the bureau’s use of artificial intelligence was not “a political mission.” He also criticized Democratic senators for focusing on other controversies during Tuesday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing rather than questioning him about the FBI’s expanded use of technology.

In a separate appearance on Fox News’ “Hannity” following the hearing, Patel accused Democratic members of the committee of behaving “like buffoons on Capitol Hill.”

Tuesday’s hearing featured contentious exchanges between Patel and Democratic senators over a number of issues involving his management of the FBI. Lawmakers questioned him about allegations that government resources had been used for personal travel, including trips involving his girlfriend, sporting events and a hunting retreat. Patel disputed allegations of improper use of government resources.

The questions followed earlier scrutiny from congressional Democrats over Patel’s use of FBI aircraft and other government resources.

Patel had previously denied wrongdoing in a July letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa, saying that his travel was “[fully compliant]” with FBI rules.

The FBI’s rapidly growing use of artificial intelligence comes amid a wider debate in Washington and Silicon Valley over how quickly increasingly powerful AI systems should be developed and deployed, and what safeguards should accompany them.

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei recently called for slowing the development of increasingly capable artificial-intelligence systems while stronger protections are put in place.

“We must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of AI models.”

Amodei has also proposed allowing competing AI companies greater latitude to cooperate on common safety standards, including through an exemption from certain antitrust restrictions.

That idea has encountered opposition from some members of Congress, including Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri.

During Patel’s Senate hearing, Hawley said there is “absolutely no world” in which he would support granting AI companies “antitrust exemptions.”

Patel, meanwhile, is arguing for broader use of the technology inside the FBI, particularly as a means of rapidly processing large amounts of information and identifying potentially imminent threats.

While Patel has publicly cited the North Carolina case and said similar interventions have occurred in roughly half a dozen other states, publicly available reporting reviewed Saturday did not provide a detailed accounting of each case or independently establish the precise role AI played in preventing each alleged plot. His claim that FBI use of AI has risen by 605 percent is likewise a figure provided by Patel and has not been accompanied publicly by a detailed breakdown explaining how the bureau calculates its overall level of AI usage.

{Matzav.com}

The Trump administration has begun erecting 30-foot border wall panels across a section of the remote Big Bend region of West Texas, moving ahead with a major expansion of the U.S.-Mexico border barrier despite opposition from local landowners, elected officials and environmental groups.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection confirmed Friday that crews have begun installing the massive steel panels in Hudspeth County, part of a 47-mile stretch designated by the government as Big Bend 1. Construction began earlier in the week, with CBP posting an image showing a crane hoisting one of the wall sections into position.

The work marks the first major wall construction to get underway in the Big Bend area under the administration’s current plans. The broader initiative calls for five separate projects across a region that encompasses hundreds of miles of the U.S.-Mexico border.

Big Bend takes its name from the sweeping curve made by the Rio Grande as it winds through the rugged West Texas landscape. The region is known for its mountains, desert terrain and dramatic river canyons and includes Big Bend National Park, Big Bend Ranch State Park and other protected areas.

CBP has emphasized that the construction now underway is not taking place inside the most prominent protected lands in the region.

The agency said it currently has no plans to erect a wall in “Big Bend National Park, Big Bend Ranch State Park, or the Black Gap Wildlife Management Area.”

However, other types of border-security infrastructure have been proposed in portions of the broader Big Bend area, including areas involving the national park, and those plans have generated lawsuits and substantial local opposition.

Work on two other projects, known as Big Bend 2 and Big Bend 4, is currently paused through September 30. CBP agreed to halt ground-disturbing activity on those projects to “allow for additional public engagement.”

Big Bend 4 includes portions of Big Bend National Park and continues east toward the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River and Lower Canyons area, while Big Bend 2 runs from the Ruidosa area toward Madera Canyon in Big Bend Ranch State Park.

The temporary pause followed legal challenges and weeks of pressure from residents and elected officials who have questioned the need for extensive barriers in the sparsely populated region and expressed concern about the effects on private property, wildlife, tourism and historically significant areas.

Opponents have argued that the Big Bend region is fundamentally different from more heavily trafficked sections of the southern border. Historically, it has recorded the fewest illegal crossings of any region along the southwest border, according to a recent Texas Tribune review.

The administration, however, has maintained that physical barriers and other security infrastructure are necessary to deter illegal crossings and strengthen control of stretches of the border that currently have little or no physical barrier.

The Big Bend construction is part of a much larger border-security effort backed by tens of billions of dollars in federal funding. The administration’s broader plans combine physical walls and barriers with access roads, surveillance equipment and other technology.

Local opposition has remained intense even as construction begins.

Clara Benson, founder of the No Big Bend Wall Coalition, told The Associated Press that her organization had received reports in recent days of construction equipment and supplies being transported into the region. She said opponents intend to continue challenging the project regardless of how much construction takes place.

“We will continue fighting to the end,” Benson said, per the AP. “You talk to people in west Texas and they say even if they put it up, we’ll fight for them to take it down. So this fight is not over.”

Opponents have also raised concerns about the potential consequences for ranching and other local businesses.

Yolanda Alvarado, a cattle rancher and regional director of No Big Bend Wall, previously warned that the effects could extend well beyond the individual properties on which barriers are erected.

“Our livelihoods are threatened at this point. Not just landowners, but business owners, and not just Big Bend National Park …. it’s everyone in this region.”

Landowners have also taken their objections to court. A coalition representing 230 landowners filed a federal lawsuit on September 14 challenging the administration’s plans to construct border barriers across portions of the Big Bend region.

One farmer involved in the litigation said the proposed construction could interfere with his family’s ability to access water needed for agricultural operations, illustrating one of the property-rights disputes surrounding the project.

Resistance has not been confined to environmental organizations or traditionally Democratic officials.

In March, sheriffs representing five West Texas counties sent a bipartisan letter to federal and state officials opposing construction of a wall in the Big Bend region.

Texas Sen. John Cornyn, a Republican, has also pressed federal officials to consult local stakeholders about the projects and the possible consequences for the region. The concerns raised have included potential effects on wildlife migration, Native American cultural sites, tourism and the regional economy.

Big Bend National Park is itself an important economic engine for the surrounding communities. More than 568,000 recreational visitors came to the park in 2025, generating nearly $64 million in economic activity, according to figures cited amid the ongoing dispute.

Federal officials have held discussions with local leaders, although those meetings have not resolved the disagreement.

Earlier this month, county judges from the region were scheduled to meet with Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin about the border projects. Mullin did not attend the meeting, leaving department staff members to speak with the officials instead.

Brewster County Judge Greg Henington said afterward that the discussion produced little new information, although he indicated that CBP officials appeared to be considering some of the concerns raised by local leaders.

“It was the same old same old,” Henington said.

Henington said local officials continued to urge Washington to clearly explain its plans, make use of existing infrastructure where possible and repair damage resulting from construction.

“I just reiterated to him that our message back to Washington is the same as it was two weeks ago,” Henington said. “Our three points were: Number one, get your message straight and stick to it. Do what you say and say what you do. Two, use existing infrastructure. And three, try to find a way to not just build a road and abandon it, and repair what you tore up.”

Despite those objections, the Big Bend 1 project in Hudspeth County is now moving forward.

CBP says it has accelerated construction elsewhere along the southern border as well, with crews currently completing approximately 12 miles of barriers per week. The agency says about 200 miles of new construction have been completed since President Trump returned to office.

For now, the legal and political battle is proceeding alongside the physical construction. Crews are installing the 30-foot panels along the Big Bend 1 corridor, while activity on Big Bend 2 and Big Bend 4 remains paused through September 30 as federal officials conduct additional discussions with local stakeholders.

The result is an unusual split across the sprawling West Texas region: construction of President Trump’s border wall has now begun in one section of Big Bend, even as lawsuits, temporary pauses and opposition from landowners and officials leave the future of several other sections unresolved.

The White House yesterday began enforcing President Donald Trump’s ban on CNN, MS NOW and Politico, denying journalists from all three news organizations entry to the White House complex and confiscating or disabling press credentials, one day after the President announced that the outlets would no longer be permitted on the grounds.

The three organizations quickly condemned the move, saying it interfered with constitutionally protected press freedoms and indicating that they were prepared to challenge the restrictions. The White House Correspondents’ Association also objected and called for the journalists’ access to be restored.

MS NOW was among the first outlets to report Saturday morning that its journalists had been stopped from entering.

“Earlier this morning MS NOW journalists were denied access to the White House grounds. The White House belongs to the American people and the decisions made inside are funded by our tax dollars,” MS NOW wrote in a statement. “MS NOW intends to take any and all steps necessary to defend our First Amendment rights and the essential role of independent journalism in our democracy.”

CBS News independently reported seeing MS NOW correspondent Akayla Gardner and a cameraman turned away from the White House at approximately 8 a.m. Saturday. Their press passes had been revoked.

CNN confirmed roughly two hours later that its own journalists had also been prevented from entering the White House grounds. Senior White House reporter Betsy Klein said her credential had been deactivated and subsequently confiscated.

CNN characterized the restriction as an “illegal assault” on press freedom and said it would continue covering the administration regardless of whether its journalists were permitted inside the White House.

“CNN’s mission to report on the U.S. government will continue regardless of any attempts to restrict physical access to the White House and other government buildings, or any other attempts to impede our journalism,” CNN said in its statement. “We have a right under the U.S. Constitution to do our reporting without hindrance or interference from the government.”

Politico subsequently disclosed that White House reporter Cheyenne Haslett had also attempted to enter the complex and was turned away.

Politico Editor-in-Chief Jonathan Greenberger said Haslett’s credential was taken after she attempted to report for work.

“A few minutes ago, our colleague Cheyenne Haslett attempted to enter the White House to do her job as a POLITICO reporter. Secret Service denied her entry to the complex and confiscated the pass that allows her access to the White House,” Greenberger said in a statement, which was first distributed internally to Politico’s newsroom.

The restrictions followed Trump’s announcement Friday that CNN, MS NOW and Politico were barred from the White House “effective immediately.” The President accused the organizations of publishing false coverage of him, his administration and the country and warned that other news organizations could eventually face similar restrictions.

“Media Outlets shouldn’t be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES when they’re covering the President of the United States, the Trump Administration, or the United States of America,” Trump wrote.

The President said Friday that his decision was based on what he described as a broader pattern of coverage rather than a single article or broadcast. Asked at a news conference whether he was attempting to intimidate journalists, Trump rejected that characterization and criticized media coverage he considers dishonest.

For Gardner, the effect of the new policy became apparent when she arrived at the White House Saturday morning and attempted to use her credential.

She said she successfully passed the initial security checkpoints but encountered a problem when she scanned the badge that normally allows her to enter the complex.

“It did not work. There was a red beeping light,” Gardner said.

According to Gardner, an officer then informed her that the credential had been disabled and took it from her. When she asked for an explanation, she said the officer told her the matter was “above him.”

The restrictions did not appear to be applied uniformly to every employee of the affected organizations Saturday morning. Gardner said an MS NOW producer accompanying her was still able to enter the White House, even though her own credential and that of a photographer had been disabled.

CNN’s Klein reported a similar encounter. She said a security officer informed her that her pass had been deactivated and confiscated it, directing her to the White House press office if she wanted additional information.

The restrictions immediately drew criticism from press-freedom organizations and journalists, including some media figures whose organizations were not affected by the ban. The critics argued that excluding journalists because of the content of their reporting raises First Amendment concerns.

CNN had already signaled that it was prepared to challenge the restriction after Trump announced it Friday.

“Should the ban which President Trump threatened go ahead, it would be an illegal assault on that fundamental and constitutionally-protected right,” a CNN spokesperson said in a statement.

Trump has had a contentious relationship with CNN for years and has repeatedly criticized both the network and individual correspondents. During an Oval Office appearance in June, Trump described CNN as “crooked as hell” and “a very corrupt organization.” He also criticized CNN White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins, calling her a “corrupt reporter” with “hatred in her eyes.”

Politico similarly indicated that it intended to contest the restrictions.

“We stand by her and all reporters here covering the White House. As we said yesterday, we will vigorously defend our First Amendment rights,” Greenberger said following Haslett’s removal.

Trump has separately accused Politico of receiving $8 million in government subsidies connected to subscriptions to Politico Pro, the publication’s premium information service. Politico has disputed the characterization that government purchases of its subscription products amounted to subsidies.

“The claims that POLITICO received government subsidies are false and have been thoroughly debunked,” Politico said in a statement.

The White House Correspondents’ Association also weighed in following Saturday’s incidents. WHCA President Jacqui Heinrich said the decision raised concerns extending beyond the three organizations immediately affected.

The action “violates the First Amendment,” Heinrich said, adding that the WHCA “calls on the administration to immediately restore our colleagues’ access.”

“The implications extend beyond these organizations: a standard used to exclude one news outlet because of its coverage could be applied to any outlet in the future,” Heinrich wrote. “The American people, through a free and independent press, must be able to scrutinize those elected to power, regardless of whether government officials view it favorably. That’s why courts have repeatedly held that once the White House provides access to journalists, it cannot deny that access arbitrarily or based on the content of their reporting.”

Previous disputes over White House press credentials have resulted in federal court rulings against administrations that withdrew individual reporters’ access without adequate process. Courts ordered the restoration of CNN correspondent Jim Acosta’s credential in 2018 and Playboy correspondent Brian Karem’s credential in 2019, although the precise legal questions surrounding the latest restrictions could be litigated separately.

The latest action represents a significant escalation in the ongoing conflict between the Trump administration and news organizations whose coverage the President has repeatedly criticized. Trump has also suggested that CNN, MS NOW and Politico may not be the last organizations affected by the new approach.

For now, all three outlets say they intend to continue covering President Trump and his administration despite being denied physical access to the White House, while their statements Saturday indicated that a legal challenge to the restrictions could follow.

WATCH: