Politics
Iran’s supreme leader killed in U.S.-Israeli attack, Trump says
TEHRAN — The U.S. and Israel pummeled Iran early Saturday in an attack aimed at razing the Islamic Republic’s nuclear ambitions and thwarting its efforts to influence the Middle East though proxies such as Hezbollah and Hamas.
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in the attack, according to President Trump, who in a post on Truth Social wrote that “one of the most evil people in History, is dead. This is not only Justice for the people of Iran, but for all Great Americans.”
More than 200 people were killed in Iran and hundreds more injured, according to Iran’s Red Crescent.
The attacks spurred a furious Iranian retaliation, with multiple barrages striking Israel, a number of Gulf nations and Jordan; and fulfilled long-standing fears that a confrontation with Iran would plunge the entire region into war.
Reports of Khamenei’s death prompted diverse reactions worldwide: In portions of Tehran and Los Angeles, home to a large Persian population, people took to the streets to celebrate. In New York, protesters gathered at Times Square to denounce the attack.
The attack came eight weeks after U.S. forces deployed by Trump toppled Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, and Trump said Saturday’s operation also presented a chance for regime change.
Addressing the Iranian people, Trump said, “When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take.”
Trump made the comments in an eight-minute prerecorded video. “This will be probably your only chance for generations,” Trump said, adding, “For many years, you have asked for America’s help, but you never got it. No president was willing to do what I am willing to do tonight.”
The Iranian government confirmed Khamenei’s death.
The attacks began with Israeli strikes Saturday morning — a workday in Iran — on Tehran, the capital, with residents speaking of attacks near Khamenei’s compound, the presidential palace, Iran’s National Security Council, the ministries of defense and intelligence, the Atomic Energy Organization and a military complex.
-
Share via
In Tehran there were scenes of panic, with residents racing to stock up on supplies, leaving shelves bare in grocery stores across the city. Others, heeding warnings from authorities of further strikes, decided to leave the capital. Images on social media showed highways leading out of Tehran choked with traffic.
“It’s going to take 10 hours at least, but it doesn’t matter,” said Zainab, who was loading her car with whatever she could stuff inside for the drive to her sister’s home in Iran’s northeast.
By the end of the day, the streets of Tehran appeared all but abandoned, with residents hunkering down for a night punctuated by the sounds of blasts reverberating across the capital.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a vociferous advocate for attacking Iran — and who has spent years urging Washington to do so — said the campaign would continue “as long as needed.”
Trump, who long insisted Iran cannot have nuclear weapons, also addressed Iran’s efforts in the Middle East in his video message.
“We are going to ensure that the region’s terrorist proxies can no longer destabilize the region or the world, and attack our forces,” he said. “And we will ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon.”
Trump also said U.S. military forces “may have casualties,” adding, “That often happens in war.”
The Iranian Foreign Ministry, in a statement, said that “Iranians have never surrendered to aggression.”
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who was leading Iran’s delegation in Oman-brokered negotiations, said the war on Iran was “wholly unprovoked, illegal and illegitimate.”
“Our powerful armed forces are prepared for this day and will teach the aggressors the lesson they deserve,” he wrote on X.
Iranians protest on Saturday in Tehran against attacks on Iran by Israel and the United States.
(Majid Saeedi / Getty Images)
Israel’s military said its attacks were the largest military flyover in its history, with some 200 warplanes dropping hundreds of munitions on about 500 objectives.
Outside of Tehran, explosions could be heard in other cities, including Isfahan, Karaj, Kermanshah, Qom and Urmia, according to Iranian state media. An attack on the city of Minab struck a girls’ school, killing at least 85 students and injuring dozens of others, state-run media said.
Iran’s Red Crescent later said 201 people were killed in attacks across the country, and that 24 out of Iran’s 32 provinces were hit. More than 700 people were injured.
Cellphone and internet communications were disrupted shortly after the attacks began but have since been restored.
Iran struck back across the Middle East, with barrages reported on U.S. bases in the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Jordan. Debris from one of those missiles killed one person in the UAE; another struck a hotel in Dubai. A Kuwaiti airport was hit, but no injuries were reported.
Iran also dispatched multiple waves of missiles to Israel, with residents in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon seeing vapor trails crisscrossing the skies above and the explosive sounds of interceptions.
The waves of ordnance spurred airspace closures across the region, with many airlines suspending service to affected countries and leaving tens of thousands of people stranded.
Araghchi informed his Iraqi counterpart, Fuad Hussein, on Saturday that Tehran will limit its response to U.S. military bases in the region, and that Iran was acting in self-defense.
But the attacks nevertheless infuriated Arab governments. Many came out with statements excoriating Iran for what they described as an unprovoked attack on their sovereignty.
Russia, whose ties with Iran have deepened in recent years, demanded Israel and the U.S. halt military operations. According to the Associated Press, U.N. Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said, “We insist on the immediate resumption of political and diplomatic settlement efforts … based on international law, mutual respect and a balance of interests.”
In a sign of the rapidly expanding impact of the war, messages purporting to be from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps were sent to ships ordering them to stay away from the Strait of Hormuz with “immediate effect.”
Shutting the strait, a strategic passageway through which one-fifth of global oil supplies pass, would probably lead to an immediate spike in energy prices and disrupt other shipping.
The opening salvos of what promises to be a lengthy campaign come two days after the U.S. and Iran concluded a third round of Oman-brokered negotiations in Geneva aimed at reducing tensions and stopping the prospect of war.
On Friday, Trump expressed displeasure with the pace of the talks, saying the Iranian side was not negotiating in “good faith” or giving in to U.S. demands. But Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said a deal was “within reach.”
On Saturday, Albusaidi expressed dismay that “active and serious negotiations have yet again been undermined.”
“Neither the interests of the United States nor the cause of global peace are well served by this. And I pray for the innocents who will suffer,” he said in a statement on X.
The American strikes on Iran drew immediate reaction on Capitol Hill as Democrats and a small bloc of Republicans accused the White House of sidelining Congress on actions they fear will trigger a broader conflict in the Middle East.
“By the president’s own words, ‘American heroes may be lost.’ That alone should have demanded the highest level of scrutiny, deliberation, and accountability, yet the president moved forward without seeking congressional authorization,” Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) called on lawmakers to back a measure he is co-sponsoring with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) that would compel the administration to seek congressional approval before engaging in any further activity in Iran.
“The American people are tired of regime change wars that cost us billions of dollars and risk our lives,” Khanna said in a video posted on X.
As Democrats warned of constitutional overreach, other lawmakers rallied behind the president.
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, said in a statement that Trump had taken “decisive action against the threat posed by the world’s leading proliferator of terrorism, the Iranian regime.”
“This is a pivotal and necessary operation to protect Americans and American interests,” Wicker said.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio notified some members of Congress’ Gang of Eight, which are the top four leaders in the House and Senate and top Democrats and Republicans on the House and Senate intelligence committees, according to CBS News.
Bulos reported from El Obeid, Sudan, Ceballos from Washington, D.C., and special correspondent Mostaghim from Tehran.
Politics
Judge Says F.B.I. Can Keep 2020 Election Records Seized From Georgia
A federal judge in Georgia ruled Wednesday that the federal government did not have to return 2020 election records seized by the F.B.I., rejecting a request from Fulton County that the materials be returned.
After F.B.I. agents carried out an extraordinary seizure of about 660 boxes of records from Fulton County’s elections hub, county officials responded in early February by filing a lawsuit demanding the return of the documents and describing the search as unconstitutional.
But Judge J.P. Boulee of the Federal District Court in Atlanta wrote in his order that while he found elements of the case “troubling,” the county had not met the bar required for him to compel the government to return the records.
“This Court acknowledges that the events leading up to this case are, in a variety of ways, unprecedented,” Judge Boulee, who was appointed to the federal bench during President Trump’s first term, wrote in his 68-page order. But he said that the county had not shown that the federal government had displayed “callous disregard” for the constitutional rights of the county.
In the lawsuit, lawyers for Fulton County argued that the federal government’s action violated Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Judge Boulee’s decision was the latest episode in a saga animated by Mr. Trump’s push for redemption after his 2020 election loss in Georgia, where he lost to Joseph R. Biden Jr. by fewer than 12,000 votes. Georgia was one of a handful of swing states that Mr. Biden narrowly won on his way to the White House.
Mr. Trump has never accepted the outcome of the election, and he has filled the Justice Department and other federal agencies with officials sympathetic to his baseless claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him.
On Jan. 28, a team of F.B.I. agents, armed with a search warrant, descended on Fulton County to take ballots, voter rolls and scanner images from the county’s elections hub, a warehouse outside Atlanta.
At the time, Democrats and election security experts argued that the search was intended to intimidate the president’s opponents and undermine confidence in the U.S. election system.
Brad Raffensperger, the Republican secretary of state in Georgia and a candidate for governor, has described the investigation as a waste of time and government resources.
Unveiling the lawsuit in February, Robb Pitts, the chairman of the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, suggested that the federal government was attempting to take over elections, declaring that “our Constitution itself is at stake.”
On Wednesday, Mr. Pitts said in a statement that he “strongly” disagreed with Judge Boulee’s decision and suggested that the county might appeal the decision.
“Our fight has exposed the flawed affidavit and suspicious timeline of federal actions,” Mr. Pitts said in the statement. “We will continue, as always, to stand by our election workers and the voters of Fulton County. We intend to vigorously pursue all available legal options.”
The county said in the lawsuit that the search was apparently based on claims about the 2020 election that had been repeatedly debunked. At least 11 lawsuits challenging the 2020 election results in Georgia were filed, according to Fulton County court records. None produced evidence of widespread fraud or malfeasance.
“Claims that the 2020 election results were fraudulent or otherwise invalid have been exhaustively reviewed and, without exception, refuted,” the county’s complaint noted, adding that the effort was a “gross intrusion” on the state’s role in conducting elections.
Some Trump supporters cheered the ruling on Wednesday. Mark Davis, a contributing writer for The Federalist, a conservative publication, wrote in a social media post that the decision was a “major victory for election integrity.”
Wendy Weiser, vice president for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice at N.Y.U. Law School, noted in an interview on Wednesday night that the search warrant process was kicked off by a well-known election denier. And the affidavit in support of the warrant relied on claims about ballots that have been widely debunked.
Ms. Weiser acknowledged that it was rare for judges to intervene and undo federal search warrants. “But if there’s ever an extraordinary time that this should happen, I think this was that,” she said.
The litigation has played out as the midterm election season has started in states across America, and as Republicans have raised concerns about election integrity and pushed for stricter rules at the ballot box.
Early voting for Georgia’s primary has already begun, with Election Day set for May 19. It was not immediately clear when or if the F.B.I. might return the 2020 election records.
A spokeswoman for Fulton County, Jessica Corbitt, said that as of Wednesday, none of the documents seized in January had been returned.
The F.B.I. declined to comment on Judge Boulee’s decision. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Justice Department has also demanded the identities of every worker who staffed the 2020 election in Fulton County, according to court records. It is unclear what the Justice Department intends to do with the names.
Politics
California immigration judge sues DOJ, alleging she was fired for being a registered Democrat, a woman over 40
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A California immigration judge who was terminated by the Trump administration is alleging in a lawsuit against the Department of Justice (DOJ) that she was fired because she is a registered Democrat and because of her affiliations with immigrant-rights groups.
The 14-page lawsuit, filed by Kyra Lilien, names the DOJ and acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche as defendants.
Lilien claims she was not retained past her probationary period due to a number of factors, including being a woman over the age of 40, being fluent in Spanish and her associations with the Hispanic community.
JUDGE BLOCKS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S MASS DISMISSALS OF PROBATIONARY FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
Kevin Owen of Gilbert Employment Law in Maryland, one of Lilien’s attorneys, told FOX San Francisco she didn’t fit their mold and that the actions taken against her were impermissible and unlawful.
The lawsuit alleges that her termination violated Lilien’s civil and First Amendment rights.
Asylum seekers, left, walk toward the southern border in Tijuana, Mexico, next to an image of a courtroom in the Concord Immigration Court in California. Kyra Lilien, an immigration judge, is suing the Trump administration over her termination, alleging she was fired because of her political affiliations. (Getty Images; Concord Immigration Court)
Lilien was initially appointed to serve at the San Francisco Immigration Court on July 23, 2023, before being transferred to the Concord Immigration Court in February 2024. In total, she served nearly two years, which is the standard probationary period immigration judges serve under Justice Department policy before their appointments are typically converted to permanent roles.
The lawsuit names nearly 30 other immigration judges from around the country who were either fired or not converted from probationary periods, including 14 from the Concord and San Francisco immigration courts.
The filing states that immigration judges who were not converted or were terminated around the same time as the plaintiff were overwhelmingly female. Fox News Digital has reached out to Lilien’s attorney, the DOJ and the DOJ’s Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR).
GROUP OF DEI WORKERS SUE TO STOP TRUMP EXECUTIVE ORDERS
Lilien was initially appointed to serve at the San Francisco Immigration Court July 23, 2023, before being transferred to the Concord Immigration Court in California in February 2024. (iStock)
Throughout her employment and during her probationary period, Lilien met or exceeded all performance standards, according to the lawsuit.
She received satisfactory assessments — the highest possible rating — in her probationary period reports for fiscal years 2024 and 2025. As a judge, Lilien denied 34% of asylum claims brought before her, according to data from TRAC Immigration.
On July 11, 2025, Lilien received a notice that her probationary period would not be converted permanently, and the message said the attorney general had decided not to extend her term or convert it to a permanent appointment pursuant to Article II of the Constitution.
Migrants line up at the southern border in San Diego in 2024. (Fox News)
The suit also alleges that Sirce Owen, who was serving as the acting EOIR director at the time, issued controversial memoranda in early 2025 that demonstrated hostility toward immigrant advocacy groups and certain hiring practices.
Owen allegedly characterized these groups in a memo as “extremist leftist organizations” that promote illegal immigration and attempt to undermine immigration courts.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
He also issued another memo criticizing the appointment practices under the Biden administration.
Lilien’s suit states that these memoranda together laid bare management’s hostility toward hiring individuals with immigrants’ rights backgrounds, women, ethnic minorities and others who may be considered “DEI” hires.
Politics
Commentary: Two winners, one loser in L.A. mayor’s debate
Karen Bass, Spencer Pratt and Nithya Raman each came into tonight’s mayoral debate with goals for what may be their only time together on stage.
As the incumbent mayor, Bass had to weather blows from her challengers while trying to sell voters on her fitness for another term, despite a disastrous 2025.
As a reality TV star with no political experience, Pratt needed to show that he could offer substance instead of just AI fanboy videos and the name-calling — “Karen Basura” — he has indulged in on social media.
Raman’s task was perhaps the hardest. As a City Council member whose two previous campaigns were backed by the local Democratic Socialists of America chapter, she needed to convince Pratt-curious voters that she’s more conservative than Bass. Yet for others, she needed to appear liberal enough to peel away support from the mayor and come out as a progressive lioness to excite Democrats in a year when GOP candidates like Pratt have to answer for the disaster that is President Trump’s second term.
Only one of the three failed.
At times, Raman was tongue-tied trying to answer simple questions. Moderators kept telling her she was going over her time. Answering a yes/no question about whether noncitizens should be allowed to vote in city elections, the council member went on and on, until the moderator cut her off.
While Raman offered some policy plans, she also played a card straight out of Trump’s arsenal. She claimed that Pratt and Bass were teaming up against her — an unlikely scenario that drew laughs from the audience. She got more and more frustrated, to the point that when Bass was allowed time for a rebuttal, she dejectedly proclaimed, “I haven’t been offered that in a lot of this debate.”
Raman, who had endorsed Bass’ reelection before throwing her hat in at the last minute, came off as inexperienced, touchy and unprepared.
The line of the night was Pratt dismissing Raman as a “random council member” — which is how the L.A. political world responded to her entry into the race. She was so upset about Pratt’s remark that she continued to whine about it to a KNBC reporter after the debate.
What’s shocking about Raman’s flop is that she should know how important it is to project well to a television audience, given that her husband is a screenwriter. Her tone was flat, when she needed to be passionate.
No one had to remind Pratt of that. He was parrying tough questions on a big stage for the first time, facing an audience who knew him only as the Angry L.A. White Guy he has reveled in playing.
He mostly succeeded.
At his best, Pratt came off as a boisterous bro with enough charm to call himself “humble” without coming off as obnoxious. He dominated the flow of conversation without coming off as commandeering, even interrupting Raman at times to let Bass speak. At one point, he even said “Sorry” when he had taken up too much time and the moderators cut him off.
He was light on specifics, other than saying he was going to do better than the others and that he would prioritize public safety above all. Instead, he was the one person on stage who used anecdotes to sell himself, citing conversations about abused animals, downtown workers too afraid to eat outside and film producers hiring local gang members to keep their shoots safe.
As a TV personality-turned-influencer, Pratt knows that storytelling is far more effective than drowning the audience in statistics, as Bass and Raman did.
But the bad Pratt flared up at times. He earned a reprimand from KNBC anchor and debate co-moderator Colleen Williams when he called the mayor an “incredible liar.” Effecting high-pitched voices to mock Bass and Raman came off as juvenile and possibly sexist. And when it came to last summer’s federal immigration raids that terrorized Southern California, Pratt appeared flummoxed when Bass pointed out that 70% of those arrested didn’t have criminal records — a use of stats that hit.
Bass was also who she had to be — measured, forceful and raring to defend her record, without coming off as defensive. She wasn’t exactly inspirational, but she didn’t have to be. The city’s powerful labor unions have backed her, along with much of the Democratic establishment.
Raman and Pratt are right in deeming Bass the old guard of a beat-up city — but the old guard didn’t get there without knowing how to win.
-
Nevada2 minutes agoNew campaign helps fans find Nevada’s iconic movie, TV scenes
-
New Hampshire8 minutes agoANCA Endorses Rep. Chris Pappas for U.S. Senate in New Hampshire
-
New Jersey14 minutes agoViolent teens clash with cops at NJ carnival — prompting officials to cancel beloved yearly event
-
New Mexico20 minutes agoAll-American Rejects bring surprise concert to Albuquerque’s South Valley
-
North Carolina26 minutes ago
NC Lottery Powerball, Pick 3 Day results for May 6, 2026
-
North Dakota32 minutes agoCFB Analyst Forecasts North Dakota State’s Postseason Matchup
-
Ohio38 minutes agoWhat is the status of the MAGA movement in Ohio? And what does it mean for the 2026 Election?
-
Oklahoma44 minutes agoSuspect arrested in deadly party shooting by Oklahoma lake