Author

admin

Browsing

The Dominican Republic deported dozens of pregnant women, mothers who had just given birth, and children, back to crisis-ridden Haiti as it cracks down on illegal immigration.

In a statement, Dominican authorities said the 135 women and children were taken to a detention center for undocumented migrants on Monday before being sent back to neighboring Haiti.

The sweeping deportations come as one of Dominican President Luis Abinader’s controversial immigration measures took effect, requiring staff at National Health Service (SNS) hospitals to ask patients for identification, a letter of employment and proof of residence, for immigration agents at the hospitals to verify.

On Monday, 33 public hospitals braced for the new policy. SNS Director Mario Lama said those hospitals are where up to 80% of public hospital births involving foreign mothers take place.

Dominican authorities say the women and children were detained because of the new protocol. They claimed in a press release that the deportees were treated humanely and with dignity, sent back on comfortable, safe buses only after they were discharged from the hospital and had a medical examination to make sure they were “free of health risks.”

Rights and health groups have criticized the move.

The Dominican Medical Association said on Instagram such rigid deportation rules for people with medical needs could put their lives at risk.

The Dominican government has stressed that noone would be denied medical care under the new protocol – but rights groups say patients in need of care may steer clear of hospitals in fear of deportation.

“These individuals face immediate deportation after receiving care. This puts people’s right to health, privacy, and physical safety at risk—and discourages vulnerable groups, such as pregnant women, children, and survivors of violence, from seeking essential medical treatment,” Amnesty International said on Monday.

‘Approaching the point of no return’

Over the past six months Dominican authorities have deported more than 180,000 people back to Haiti, a country plagued by gang violence that has seeped into every aspect of life.

The Dominican Republic, which shares the Island of Hispaniola with its neighbor, has seen an influx of migrants fleeing violence in Haiti – where essential supplies are not keeping up with the population’s needs and hundreds of schools have shut down.

Dozens of health facilities have shut down in Haiti because of the insecurity, one of the latest being the University Hospital of Mirebalais. Late last month, gangs stormed the town, setting fire to buildings and posing a risk to the hospital, forcing it to evacuate its staff and patients, according to Partners in Health, the group supporting the hospital.

The United Nations’ top Haiti envoy María Isabel Salvador warned this week that Haiti is “approaching the point of no return.” She added: “Without timely and decisive international support, the violence will continue to escalate, and Haiti could face total collapse.”

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum says her government plans to ban advertisements from the US Department of Homeland Security, which have broadcast across the country in recent weeks and show Secretary Kristi Noem warning migrants not to enter the United States illegally.

In one 30-second ad, Noem is seen in a light purple suit saying: “If you are a criminal alien considering entering America illegally, don’t even think about it.”

She goes on to warn that if migrants break US laws, “We will hunt you down.”

Mexico’s president has denounced the adverts, which have aired in the middle of soccer matches and on primetime programming, as “discriminatory.”

On Tuesday, her government sent lawmakers reform proposals that would prohibit foreign governments from spreading what it considers political and ideological propaganda in the country.

“We do not agree with the discriminatory propaganda against the migrant population that has been broadcast on television, radio, and social media by the United States government,” Sheinbaum said.

“The data shows the world is hearing our message. Border crossings have reached the lowest ever recorded,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in an email. “Thanks to President Trump and Secretary Noem, we have the most secure border in history.”

The US advertisements are part of a multimillion-dollar messaging campaign meant to deter illegal entry into the United States. The DHS says the videos are “hyper-targeted” at undocumented immigrants and would be distributed domestically and internationally on TV, radio, social media and through text messages.

In another series of adverts announced on Monday, Noem is seen telling undocumented immigrants to self-deport or face hefty fines, imprisonment and deportation.

Drawing the line at political ‘propaganda’

Sheinbaum argued this week that there’s precedent for such a ban, saying Mexico’s telecommunications law previously had an article barring domestic media from disseminating foreign political propaganda, but that the article was removed during a previous administration.

“I have requested an investigation into how that article was removed,” she said during her morning news conference on Monday. “But we think our sovereignty and respect for Mexico deserve reinserting that article into the law.”

The president of the Senate Gerardo Fernández Noroña said Tuesday that the upper house would fast-track Sheinbaum’s measure and send it to the Chamber of Deputies as soon as possible.

“I don’t think there is a single parliamentary group that opposes this reinstatement,” Fernández Noroña told reporters.

Sheinbaum insisted that Mexico would still allow countries to run ads that promote tourism and culture, but that it would draw the line at political “propaganda.”

“If any country in the world wants to promote itself in our country or we in another country, then there would be no problem. The problem is this propaganda from the government itself, in addition to acts that we consider discriminatory,” she said Tuesday.

Mexico’s anti-discrimination agency said it sent a letter to broadcasters last week, asking them to stop airing the TV spot.

“From our analysis, we have found that the spot contains a discriminatory message that violates human dignity and may encourage acts of rejection or violence against people on the move,” the letter from the National Council to Prevent Discrimination read.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Russia launched a wave of deadly attacks against Kyiv early Thursday, hours after US President Donald Trump accused his Ukrainian counterpart of harming peace talks in a fresh tirade against Volodymyr Zelensky.

Drone and missile attacks hit 13 locations across the Ukrainian capital, killing at least nine people and wounding more than 70 others, according to Ukraine’s emergency services.

Engineers, rescue workers and recovery dogs are searching for people believed to be trapped under the rubble of a home destroyed by the strikes in the Sviatoshyn district, said Ukraine’s interior minister, Ihor Klymenko.

“There is information about two children who still cannot be found at the scene,” said Klymenko, adding the situation was “tragic.”

The city’s mayor Vitali Klitschko earlier urged people to take shelter. The Kyiv city military administration has since broadcast an all-clear message.

At least 42 people were taken to hospital, including six children, according to Ukraine’s emergency services.

Klymenko said eight regions of the country were targeted in what he called “a massive combined Russian attack” that hit Kyiv, Zhytomyr, Dnipro, Kharkiv, Poltava, Khmelnytsky, Sumy and Zaporizhzhia.

The attacks hit after Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky became involved in a new public spat, specifically over the future of Crimea, a Ukrainian peninsula illegally annexed by Russia in 2014.

Any move to recognize Russia’s control of Crimea would reverse a decade of US policy and could upset the widely held post-World War Two consensus that international borders should not be changed by force.

Zelensky has repeatedly said Ukraine would not accept that, saying it would go against the country’s constitution.

On Wednesday, Trump said Zelensky’s position was “very harmful to the Peace Negotiations with Russia.”

“It’s inflammatory statements like Zelenskyy’s that makes it so difficult to settle this War. He has nothing to boast about!” he posted on Truth Social.

Trump made the comments hours after Vice President JD Vance threatened to abandon negotiations, telling reporters during a visit to India that a “very explicit proposal” had been put to both Russia and Ukraine and that it was “time for them to either say yes or for the US to walk away.”

Earlier, talks between Ukraine, the US, Britain, France and Germany aimed at furthering work towards a ceasefire were downgraded to take place among officials, after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio withdrew.

“Emotions have run high today,” Zelensky said on X Wednesday as the day’s developments threw fresh uncertainty over the diplomatic efforts to end the war.

The Trump administration’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff is expected to visit Moscow on Friday for discussions with Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Relations between India and Pakistan are cratering following a deadly attack in the disputed Himalayan region of Jammu and Kashmir that left more than two dozen tourists dead, raising fears of another military escalation between the nuclear-armed rivals.

New Delhi downgraded ties with Islamabad, summoned its top diplomat, suspended for the first time its involvement in a crucial water-sharing treaty and shut a key border crossing, among other punitive measures in the wake of what was the region’s worst assault on civilians in years.

All but one of the 26 people massacred were Indian citizens, prompting a new wave of unrest in a region claimed by both Pakistan and India and that has been the epicenter of often violent territorial struggle between the two countries.

For decades, several domestic militant groups, demanding either independence for Kashmir or for the area to become part of Pakistan, have fought Indian security forces, leaving tens of thousands killed in the violence.

On Wednesday, India accused Pakistan of supporting terrorist groups in the region, after a little-known militant group called The Resistance Front claimed responsibility. Pakistan has denied any involvement.

India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Thursday vowed to pursue the attackers “to the ends of the earth,” during a speech in the northeastern state of Bihar.

“From the soil of Bihar I say to the whole world, India will identify, track and punish every terrorist and their backers,” he said, using English rather than his usual Hindi.

“India’s spirit will never be broken by terrorism. Terrorism will not go unpunished. Every effort will be made to ensure that justice is done. The entire nation is firm in this resolve.”

Here’s what you need to know.

What happened in Pahalgam?

Gunmen on Tuesday opened fire on sightseers in a popular travel destination in the mountainous destination of Pahalgam in Indian-administered Kashmir, a rare assault on tourists.

At least 25 Indian citizens and one Nepali national were killed in the massacre, which unfolded in a meadow in the Baisaran Valley – which is only accessible by foot or on horseback.

Eyewitnesses described scenes of horror as the gunmen approached, opening fire on tourists from close range. Some recalled how the men were singled out and shot at. Other survivors speaking to local media said the gunmen accused the families of supporting Prime Minister Modi before shooting.

Photos and videos of the aftermath – showing lifeless bodies strewn on the ground and grieving loved ones wailing in fear – have reverberated across social media, a vivid portrayal of the pain and suffering endured by families whose holidays ended in horror.

Indian authorities have heightened police and military deployment to the region and personnel are on the hunt for the perpetrators.

Modi in his Thursday speech vowed punishment for the perpetrators of the attack.

“I want to say in clear words that whoever has carried out this attack, those terrorists, and the people who devised this attack, will be punished in a manner worse than anything they can imagine,” he said.

Who are The Resistance Front?

Kashmir Resistance, also known as The Resistance Front (TRF), is a relatively new militant outfit that has claimed killings of civilians from minority communities residing in Kashmir in recent years. Not a huge amount is known about them.

TRF declared its existence in 2019 through the encrypted messaging app Telegram, after claiming responsibility for a grenade attack in Jammu and Kashmir’s largest city of Srinagar, according to research by the New Delhi-based think tank Observer Research Foundation (ORF).

The arrival of TRF is portrayed as the “inception of a new indigenous resistance in Kashmir,” ORF said in 2021.

India has classified TRF as a “terrorist organization” and linked it to the outlawed Islamist group Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, which was behind the deadly Mumbai attacks in 2008 and has a much higher profile.

“TRF positions itself as a political resistance force, born in Kashmir and one for Kashmir, against illegal occupational forces, having no centralised jihadi figure or leadership,” according to ORF.

Kashmir police on Thursday published notices naming three suspects allegedly involved in the attack. Two of the three are Pakistani nationals, according to the notices. They did not say how the men were identified.

Why is Kashmir important to India and Pakistan?

Kashmir is one of the world’s most dangerous flashpoints. Claimed in its entirety by both India and Pakistan, the mountainous region has been the epicenter for more than 70 years of an often-violent territorial struggle between the nuclear-armed neighbors.

The festering issue has spurred three wars between the countries and a de facto border called the Line of Control divides it between New Delhi and Islamabad.

Tensions between Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan over the disputed region have surged in recent years, after the Modi-led government revoked its constitutional autonomy in 2019, bringing it under the direct control of New Delhi.

While the Indian government has said that militancy has since declined amid a heavy military presence, attacks have continued to plague the region, sparking unrest and protests. Meanwhile, there has been heavy media censorship and communication blackouts.

Analysts say Tuesday’s massacre shattered the illusion of calm that Modi has projected of the region and raises questions of how such a security lapse could have occurred in one of the most militarized zones in the world.

How have India and Pakistan responded?

India has not publicly blamed any group for the attack but has justified its retaliatory moves as a response to Pakistan’s alleged “support for cross-border terrorism.”

Pakistan has denied any involvement and will convene a national security meeting on Thursday to discuss next steps.

New Delhi announced several punitive measures against Islamabad a day after the attack, including shutting a key border crossing and further restricting already limited visas for Pakistani citizens. It also expelled military, naval and air advisors from the Pakistani High Commission in New Delhi.

But perhaps among the most significant acts of retaliation thus far is New Delhi suspending its role in the Indus Water Treaty, an important water-sharing pact between India and Pakistan that has been in force since 1960 and is regarded as a rare diplomatic success story between the two fractious neighbors.

The enormous Indus River system, which supports livelihoods across Pakistan and northern India, originates in Tibet, flowing through China and Indian-controlled Kashmir before reaching Pakistan. The vast volume of water is a vital resource for both countries, and the treaty governs how it is shared.

“Downgrading diplomatic ties and holding the Indus Water Treaty in abeyance does not bode well for stability in the region,” said Fahd Humayun, assistant professor of political science at Tufts University.

“Not only does the suspension amount to a violation of international treaty obligations, but the right to water as a lower riparian country is seen as a national security issue by Pakistan and suspending (it) will be read as a belligerent action.”

Pakistan’s Minister of Power Awais Leghari on Wednesday called the move “an act of warfare.”

“Every drop is ours by right, and we will defend it with full force — legally, politically, and globally,” said Leghari.

What is the situation like in Kashmir?

Thousands have flocked to the streets to condemn the deadly attacks as business owners express concerns over the impact it has already had on the popular tourist destination during peak season.

“There has been 80-90% cancellation of all our tours and travels in the coming days and weeks,” said Mohsin, who goes by one name, and manages a tour company in the region. “We are in complete monetary loss. I might have to shift to another business if this continues.”

Schools and businesses have resumed after being shut on Wednesday in many parts of Kashmir, while demonstrations of solidarity erupted in Srinagar’s Lal Chowk, the city square.

“We all could not just sit by and watch. We came out to show emotion, solidarity, and condemn the killings,” said local resident Umar Nazir Tibetbaqan. “Our protests (on Wednesday) were a signal to everyone that all Kashmiris stand with the country in this hour of grief.”

Meanwhile, anti-Pakistan protests have erupted in India’s capital Delhi and several other cities, raising fears of fueling anti-Kashmiri and anti-Muslim sentiment.

What happens next?

All eyes are now on how New Delhi and Islamabad will respond. And the question, analysts say, is not if there will be military retaliation but when.

“Modi will have a very strong, if not irresistible, political compulsion to retaliate with force,” said Arzan Tarapore, a research scholar from Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation.

“We don’t know what that would look like, and it’s somewhat meaningless to speculate at this point, but I think the 2019 Balakot crisis provides some cues on what to watch for in India’s response,” Tarapore said, referring to New Delhi’s response to a militant attack on Indian troops which killed at least 40 paramilitary personnel in Indian-administered Kashmir.

New Delhi retaliated by launching airstrikes on Pakistan, the first such incursion into its territory since the 1971 war.

“The key question will be will they seek to impose more meaningful, tangible costs on terrorist groups, including by targeting their leadership or headquarters facilities? Or will India go even further, crossing the threshold to attack the Pakistan army?” said Tarapore.

“India’s military capabilities have grown since 2019, so it may feel emboldened to take on such bigger targets.”

And while India’s military prowess has grown in the years since, Pakistan has been rocked by political instability and economic disarray.

Yet Humayun, the professor from Tufts, said should the Indian government choose to resort to military action, there is “every reason to believe that Pakistan will respond in kind.”

“Absent strategic restraint or third-party intervention, the chances of uncontrolled escalation in the coming days is thus not insignificant,” he said.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

The family of a jailed Egyptian dissident has expressed renewed fears for his life as his health worsens more than 50 days after he went on hunger strike.

Prominent government critic Alaa Abd El-Fattah, a 42-year-old dual Egyptian British citizen, has remained in prison despite completing his sentence last September, according to his family, which has appealed to the UK prime minister to help secure his release.

The activist’s health has deteriorated since he began his third full-scale hunger strike in less than two years on March 1 in solidarity with his mother’s own partial hunger strike to call for his release, his family said in a statement on Facebook Tuesday.

Abd El-Fattah has suffered from vomiting, stomach flu and severe fatigue. He has been diagnosed with chronic inflammation of the esophagus and his body is rejecting previously prescribed medication because of his prolonged hunger strike, according to the statement.

His mother, Laila Soueif, “expressed her deep concern for her son and his health, saying he could not bear the strike. She renewed her demand for his release,” the statement said.

Abd El-Fattah’s more than decade-long imprisonment has long drawn international condemnation.

Arrested repeatedly since the height of the Egyptian uprising in 2011, he was sentenced in 2021 to an additional five years in prison for spreading false news and assaulting a police officer – charges that human rights organizations say were politically motivated.

Amnesty International says Abd El-Fattah is a political prisoner who remains imprisoned in “arbitrary” detention, according to a statement from the rights group in February.

Abd El-Fattah was granted British citizenship in 2022, through his British-born mother, in what his family said was part of the campaign for his release and to shed light on the struggle of his fellow inmates.

On Tuesday, his sister Sanaa Seif issued an urgent plea to UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to raise his case with Egyptian authorities.

“I’m always afraid that we are on the verge of a tragedy. We need Keir Starmer to do all he can to bring Alaa home to us,” she said.

Starmer, who met with the jailed activist’s mother in February, previously vowed to “do all that I can to secure (Alaa’s) release.”

In 2022, then-UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak raised the activist’s case during a meeting with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi on the sidelines of the COP27 climate summit, a Downing Street spokesperson said at the time.

Sisi, a former military general, has long faced criticism for cracking down on dissent, imprisoning activists, journalists, and opposition figures since he came to power in 2014.

Abd El-Fattah’s mother launched her own hunger strike last September to demand her son’s release.

She was hospitalized in February on her 149th day of protest after her blood sugar, blood pressure, and sodium levels plummeted to critical lows. Abd El-Fattah escalated his protest following her hospitalization, according to relatives.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

The top producer at CBS’ “60 Minutes” announced Tuesday he would step down from the newsmagazine because he had lost his journalistic independence.  

“Over the past months, it has … become clear that I would not be allowed to run the show as I have always run it,” Bill Owens said in a memo to staff members, which was obtained by NBC News. “To make independent decisions based on what was right for ‘60 Minutes,’ right for the audience.” 

“So, having defended this show — and what we stand for — from every angle, over time with everything I could, I am stepping aside so the show can move forward,” Owens added.  

Owens’ departure comes during a tumultuous chapter for “60 Minutes.” President Donald Trump has sued CBS for $10 billion over an October interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris that the president claims was deceptively edited. The network has denied that claim. 

Trump amended the lawsuit earlier this year, upping his damages claim to $20 billion.

“Former President Donald Trump’s repeated claims against ‘60 Minutes’ are false,” CBS News said in a statement in October. “The interview was not doctored” and the show “did not hide any part of Vice President Kamala Harris’s answer to the question at issue.”  

In a separate statement, “60 Minutes” said it gave an excerpt from its interview with Harris to the Sunday morning program “Face the Nation,” which used a longer section of the former Democratic presidential candidate’s answer to a question.

“Same question. Same answer. But a different portion of the response. When we edit any interview, whether a politician, an athlete, or movie star, we strive to be clear, accurate and on point,” the statement said. “The portion of her answer on 60 Minutes was more succinct, which allows time for other subjects in a wide ranging 21-minute-long segment.”  

Bill Owens, Executive Producer of 60 Minutes, CBS News, in Toronto on June 22, 2022.Piaras Ó Mídheach / Sportsfile via Getty Images file

Trump has repeatedly lambasted the venerable newsmagazine over its reporting on him and his administration.  

In a post on Truth Social on April 13, for example, Trump wrote: “Almost every week, 60 Minutes … mentions the name ‘TRUMP’ in a derogatory and defamatory way, but this Weekend’s ‘BROADCAST’ tops them all.” He appeared to take issue with segments about the war in Ukraine and his interest in acquiring Greenland.  

Trump added that he believed CBS should lose its broadcast license and “pay a big price.” He said he hoped Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr would “impose the maximum fines and punishment.”   

Owens’ exit, first reported by The New York Times, also comes at a pivotal moment for CBS’ parent company, Paramount. Shari Redstone, Paramount’s controlling shareholder, reportedly needs the Trump administration to approve her media conglomerate’s sale to Skydance Media, a production and finance company run by David Ellison, the son of tech mogul Larry Ellison. 

The New York Times reported in late January that Paramount was in settlement talks with Trump. The Times later reported that Owens told staff members he would not apologize for the Harris interview as part of any prospective settlement. NBC News has not independently verified either report. 

In his memo to staff, Owens said “60 Minutes” would “continue to cover the new administration, as we will report on future administrations. We will report from war zones, investigate injustices and educate our audience. In short, ‘60 Minutes’ will do what it has done for 57 years.”  

“Thank you all, remain focused on the moment, our audience deserves it,” Owens said in closing.  

Wendy McMahon, president and CEO of CBS News, notified company employees by email that Owens would be leaving and touted his work at the company.

“Tom and I are committed to 60 Minutes and to ensuring that the mission and the work remain our priority,” McMahon said, referring to CBS News president and executive editor Tom Cibrowski. 

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Tech billionaire Elon Musk said Tuesday that he will begin dedicating more time to Tesla and less to his work with the Trump administration starting next month, providing a relief to Tesla investors fed up with his political work and signaling a possible shift in power at the White House.

Musk’s comments came on Tesla’s call with investors following the company reporting a sizable drop in first-quarter profit and revenue. The company warned that the political environment along with the Trump administration’s tariff plans were challenges for its business.

‘Starting probably next month, May, my time obligation to DOGE will drop significantly,’ Musk said, referring to his Department of Government Efficiency.

‘I think I’ll continue to spend a day or two per week on government matters for as long as the president would like me to do so, and for as long as it is useful, but starting next month, I’ll be allocating far more of my time to Tesla, now that the major work of establishing the Department of Government Efficiency is done,’ he said.

Musk, the CEO of Tesla, has faced a swell of opposition for his work with President Donald Trump, which has made Tesla a growing target for protests and even vandalism. Musk has acknowledged that his move into politics has hit the company’s stock price.

Tesla — which is increasingly trying to diversify into high-tech products like robots — said profits fell 71% to $409 million, compared with $1.39 billion during the same quarter one year ago.

Shares of Tesla were up about 4% in after-hours trading, though the company has lost 50% of its value from its mid-December peak.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Musk’s announcement.

Musk reiterated on the call that he intends to pivot Tesla from its established electric car business into two new products: robotaxis and humanoid robots, two ideas that investors have been skeptical about.

Musk said that Tesla was still on track to begin selling robotaxi rides in Austin, Texas, in June, putting Tesla into head-to-head competition with Google spinoff Waymo, which launched robotaxi rides there in March via the Uber app. 

Tesla, in its written earnings report, said that ‘uncertainty in the automotive and energy markets’ associated with ‘rapidly evolving trade policy,’ along with ‘changing political sentiment,’ could have ‘a meaningful impact on demand for our products in the near-term.’

It also said updates to its best-selling Model Y that affected its availability on the market contributed to the shortfall.

‘We remain committed to expanding our business model to include delivering autonomous robots across multiple form factors and use cases — powered by our real-world AI expertise — to our customers and for use in our factories, as we navigate these headwinds,’ it said.

It said it was not prepared to provide guidance for performance the rest of the year — a decision other companies are also making — because of broad trends that include the impact from tariffs. Tesla has boasted that is ‘the most American-made’ car, but it still faces tariff exposure due to imported parts.

It said it would ‘revisit’ guidance for 2025 in three months.

‘It is difficult to measure the impacts of shifting global trade policy on the automotive and energy supply chains, our cost structure and demand for durable goods and related services,’ Tesla said in the outlook section of its report.

Musk, on the conference call, said he pressed Trump to reverse course on his tariff policy but was not successful.

‘I’m one of many advisers to the president. I’m not the president, but I’ve made my opinion clear to the president,’ he said. ‘I’m an advocate of predictable tariff structures.’

Musk has faced pressure from many sides, including from investors who would like him to pay more attention to the company and from his job in the Trump administration, where he has volunteered to slash government programs.

Musk has kept his CEO roles at Tesla and SpaceX even while he has spent much of his time with President Donald Trump and his Department of Government Efficiency, the group charged with reducing federal spending. 

A CNBC All-America Economic survey released earlier Tuesday underscored the depth of the negative sentiment toward Tesla and Musk: 47% of the public had negative views of the company versus 27% positive, and half had negative views of Musk, compared with 36% who saw him positively.

‘Tesla has become a political symbol around the world,’ Daniel Ives, managing director at Wedbush Securities, said in an interview on CNBC after the earnings report was released.

Ives said the political controversy has hurt Tesla not only by reducing demand for vehicles but also because Tesla has become a target for retaliatory tariffs by other nations, such as China.

The earnings report did not explicitly mention the repeated vandalism against Tesla vehicles or the peaceful protests at its showrooms, instead citing the ‘changing political sentiment’ as a headwind for demand.

A key question for Tesla, Musk and the Trump administration has been how long Musk will remain in his White House position. His job as a “special government employee” is time-limited by law to 130 days during any period of 365 consecutive days, which could put his legally mandated endpoint as early as late May. Musk told Fox News this month that he believed “most” of his work would be done by the deadline. 

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

It might be time for Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s own fork in the road.  

The electric carmaker is set to report quarterly earnings Tuesday afternoon that may say a lot about which direction Musk and the company he has ridden to immense wealth will go next.  

The company will update investors on revenue, profit and other key figures after months of turmoil as Musk continues to dedicate a large portion of his time to the Trump administration’s attempt to radically remake the federal government, far away from his corporate responsibilities at Tesla, SpaceX and his other companies. 

With Tesla’s stock and brand reputation getting pummeled — and with President Donald Trump’s tariff policy threatening to upend the automotive market, Tesla included — many Tesla investors have called on Musk to scale back or end his government work entirely and return his focus to business.  

The Trump administration has sent “fork in the road” emails encouraging federal workers to consider quitting their jobs.  

Even some of Tesla’s loudest proponents, such as Daniel Ives, managing director at Wedbush Securities, have lost patience with how Musk is dividing up his attention.  

“This is a moment of truth for Musk,” Ives told NBC News. “If he picks staying with DOGE and the Trump White House, the future of Tesla could be negatively altered permanently. The brand damage he’s created by being part of the Trump administration has already been a devastating blow to Tesla’s reputation, stock and confidence. … He’s made Tesla into a political symbol, which is one of the worst things that can happen to a consumer brand.” 

DOGE refers to the Department of Government Efficiency, Musk’s team of staffers spread throughout the executive branch helping to order spending cuts. Musk is a “special government employee” who’s expected to leave the Trump administration at some point, but with no set date to depart. 

Musk and Tesla didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Monday afternoon on whether he is stretched too thin and, if so, what they might do about it.  

Tesla is due to report earnings after the market closes. It also is scheduled to host a conference call with Wall Street analysts, and Musk sometimes joins the calls.  

Several possible paths lie ahead for Musk and Tesla, and it’s not clear which is most likely. Musk could scale back or end his White House job and spend more time at Tesla. Or he could quit as Tesla CEO and keep his focus on politics, putting the company’s future and brand in someone else’s hands.  

The status quo may also endure, with Musk continuing to bet that he has enough attention for everyone.  

Tesla’s stock price has provided a snapshot of the tumultuous run since Musk threw himself into the Trump administration. While its stock price is almost even with where it traded in the days ahead of the election, its shares are down more than 50% from their December peak. Still, Tesla’s total market cap remains just above $700 billion, well above those of its auto industry competitors but below those of major tech companies. 

On Monday, Tesla shares plunged again ahead of the earnings report, falling 5.8%.  

Tuesday will mark Tesla’s first earnings report since the full extent of Musk’s government role and ambitions became clear. Tesla last reported on its financials on Jan. 29, early in Trump’s second term.  

In the past year, Musk has somewhat aggressively started to pivot Tesla into new possible lines of business, including a proposed Cybercab autonomous vehicle and a potential robotic humanoid called Optimus, although the company hasn’t shipped either of those products and some on Wall Street are skeptical that they’ll be successful.  

In a note to clients, Wells Fargo stock researchers said they expected to hear more from Tesla on Tuesday about Cybercab and Optimus, but they called those subjects “razzle dazzle” that “distract from fundamentals.” Wells Fargo has a price target of $130 a share for Tesla, far below the $227.50 close on Monday and near the low end of analyst price targets, according to The Wall Street Journal.  

Tesla has already issued warning signs about its health. It reported April 2 that vehicle deliveries in the first quarter declined 13% from a year earlier, battered by rising competition and fallout from Musk’s involvement in politics.  

Hundreds of protests at Tesla showrooms have also weighed on the company. Under the banner of a “Tesla Takedown,” opponents of Musk and Trump’s government policies have targeted the company to try to gain leverage over Musk, and demonstrators have continued to swarm Tesla locations, especially on weekends.  

Allen Adamson, a co-founder of Metaforce, a marketing and brand consultancy, said that if any other corporation faced a similar image problem, the board of directors might have stepped in to switch out the CEO. But Tesla’s board is famously close to and supportive of Musk.  

Now, Adamson said, Tesla faces risk whichever path it and Musk follow.  

“Musk is the magic that has fueled the stock price,” he said. “If he steps aside [as Tesla CEO], he takes the rocket fuel out of the Tesla stock price, but if he stays, he’s equally damaging the company’s prospects.”  

One unknown factor is how much of the damage to Tesla’s brand is permanent. In other words: If Musk were to leave the White House and return to business, would there be any improvement in the brand’s public esteem?  

Ives said it’s hard to measure the damage Tesla has sustained.  

“It’s taken on a life of its own that he never expected — this has become something bigger and much more of a raging fire than he ever expected around Tesla,” he said. “He sells a consumer brand globally, and the demand destruction … you can’t wear rose-colored glasses about it, and to not see it would be smoke and mirrors.” 

If Musk does turn his attention back to politics, he’d still have an enormous challenge to rebuild the company’s reputation, Adamson said. He said that Musk would need to stop other polarizing behavior, such as posting on X about controversial topics, and that he would have to improve the company’s innovation. Tesla has launched only one new consumer vehicle since 2020, and that product, the Cybertruck, isn’t widely popular. 

“I don’t think he can pull a rabbit out of a hat fast enough to prevent a continued spiral down,” Adamson said.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Starbucks is imposing new limits on what its baristas can wear under their green aprons.

Starting May 12, employees will be required to wear a solid black shirt and khaki, black or blue denim bottoms. Shirts can be short- or long-sleeved and collared or collarless, the company said in a memo released Monday. Starbucks will give each employee two free T-shirts.

Starbucks said the new dress code will make its green aprons stand out and create a sense of familiarity for customers. It comes as the company is trying to reestablish a warmer, more welcoming experience in its store.

“By updating our dress code, we can deliver a more consistent coffeehouse experience that will also bring simpler and clearer guidance to our partners, which means they can focus on what matters most, crafting great beverages and fostering connections with customers,” the company said in a post on its website.

But some workers protested the move. Starbucks Workers United, a labor group that has unionized workers at more than 550 of Starbucks’ 10,000 company-owned U.S. stores, said it told the company last week that it has already negotiated a tentative dress code agreement during bargaining sessions with the company. The union said it opposes any changes to the dress code until bargaining concludes and a labor agreement is reached.

Jasmine Leli, a Starbucks barista and union bargaining delegate, said the company should be focusing on things that improve store operations, like appropriately staffing stores and giving workers a guaranteed number of hours.

“Instead of addressing the most pressing issues baristas have been raising for years, Starbucks is prioritizing a limiting dress code that won’t improve the company’s operation,” Leli said in a statement provided by the union. “They’re forcing baristas to pay for new clothes when we’re struggling as it is on Starbucks wages and without guaranteed hours.”

The new guidance comes nearly a decade after Starbucks loosened its dress code to give employees more opportunity for self-expression. In 2016, the company expanded the color of shirts employees could wear, adding gray, navy, dark denim and brown to the previous guidance of black or white. It also allowed patterned shirts in those colors.

In 2019, the company tweaked the dress code again, allowing one facial piercing as long as it was no larger than a dime. The new dress code still allows one facial piercing.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

LOS ANGELES — A group of California homeowners is taking on insurance companies that they say illegally coordinated to deny coverage to fire-prone areas, leaving thousands of displaced residents drastically underinsured as they fight for funding to rebuild.

The homeowners, many of whom were affected by the recent wildfires that torched large swaths of Los Angeles, have filed a lawsuit alleging that California insurance companies colluded in a “nefarious conspiracy” to shut out high-risk homeowners from the insurance market.

The complaint, filed Friday in Los Angeles County, accuses dozens of major insurance companies and their subsidiaries of collaborating in a “group boycott” of certain areas to eliminate competition and force homeowners toward the state’s insurer of last resort, a program known as the California FAIR Plan.

The lawsuits name California’s largest home insurers, including State Farm, Farmers, Berkshire Hathaway, Allstate and Liberty Mutual. None of them have provided a comment on the allegations.

The FAIR Plan has its own reserves and is intended to provide basic insurance to residents who cannot find a policy through the private marketplace. While it was created by the governor and the Legislature, and the state’s insurance commissioner has oversight, it is not a public program. The insurance companies named in the lawsuit jointly own and operate the FAIR plan, offering terms that limit their risk and place a higher burden on policyholders.

“They knew that they could force people, by dropping insurance, into that plan which had higher premiums and far lower coverages,” Robert Ruyak, an attorney with Larson LLP, the law firm that brought the complaint, said. “They realized that they could take this device, which is to protect consumers, and turn it into something that protected them.”

Ruyak argues the insurance companies knew they could limit their liability by directing policyholders onto the FAIR Plan, which allows companies to recoup up to half of their losses through premium increases, by agreeing that no company would insure high-risk areas.

“All of these insurance companies participate in the California FAIR Plan. They own it and manage it. It is not a California entity, it is not even a separate entity … the only way this scheme would work is if no one would pick up a dropped policy at any price, on any terms. And that’s what happened.”

Millions of U.S. homeowners have in recent years struggled to buy property insurance as companies have increasingly declined to offer coverage to people who live in high-risk areas, particularly as climate change has supercharged some natural disasters. An NBC News analysis in 2023 found that a quarter of all U.S. homes may be at risk of a climate-induced insurance shock.

California has been among the hardest hit by what some have called an “insurance crisis.” The state’s FAIR Plan, meanwhile, has been the subject of growing scrutiny and frustration from insurance regulators and customers.

The plaintiffs are asking for a jury trial and seeking payment for three times their damages. 

A separate class-action lawsuit filed Friday makes similar allegations.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS