World
Can Donald Trump fire Jerome Powell, US Federal Reserve chair?
President Donald Trump is sending mixed messages about whether he will fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.
Trump said on July 16 he is “not planning on doing anything” when asked if he would fire Powell. However, he also said he doesn’t “rule out anything” and mentioned a renovation project with ballooning costs.
“I think it’s highly unlikely unless he has to leave for fraud,” Trump said. “And it’s possible there’s fraud involved with the $2.5, $2.7 billion renovation. This is a renovation, how do you spend $2.7 billion? And he didn’t have proper clearance.”
The Federal Reserve has been undergoing building renovations since 2021 on a project that the board that controls the Fed first approved in 2017. The project’s cost of $2.5bn is about $600m above the original budget, according to The Associated Press.
The cost has increased because of design changes, increasing labour and material costs and “unforeseen conditions”, such as “more asbestos than anticipated”, the Fed said in an FAQ.
But Trump’s administration seems to be using the renovation as a possible reason to oust Powell. Russ Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, sent Powell a July 10 letter saying the project is “out of compliance with the approved plan” and “in violation of” the National Capital Planning Act, which outlines how agencies can make changes to federal buildings.
Trump’s feud with Powell isn’t new. For months, the president has criticised Powell, whom he appointed to the role in 2017, for refusing to drop interest rates. The Fed raised interest rates in 2022 and 2023 during former President Joe Biden’s administration as a response to inflation.
Since Trump entered the White House in January, he has told Powell to resign and threatened to fire him.
“If I want him out, he’ll be out of there real fast, believe me,” Trump said in April. “I’m not happy with him.”
In November, after the 2024 election, reporters asked Powell if he would step down or whether he thought Trump had the authority to fire him.
“Not permitted under the law,” Powell said.
Trump spoke to a group of Republican lawmakers on July 15 about firing the chair, several news organisations reported. Trump showed lawmakers a draft letter firing Powell, The New York Times reported.
Trump denied having written a letter.
“No, I talked about the concept of firing him. I said, ‘What do you think?’ Almost every one of them said I should,” Trump said. “But I’m more conservative than they are.”
While Trump attributed his reticence to fire Powell to his “conservatism”, the bigger impediment is a question of legality. Here’s why.
What is the role of the Federal Reserve; who appoints its chair?
The Federal Reserve is the country’s central bank. Its responsibilities include setting interest rates and supervising and regulating banks. It was created in 1913 as part of the Federal Reserve Act and is run by an independent board of governors. The seven governors that make up the board are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The president selects the chair and two vice chairs from among the seven, according to the Congressional Research Service.
While talking to reporters, Trump appeared to overlook that he was the person who nominated Powell to be the chair in 2017: “I’m surprised he was appointed,” Trump said. “I was surprised, frankly, that Biden put him in and extended him.”
In 2021, Biden nominated him for a second four-year term, which is set to end in May 2026. After that, Powell can remain on the board of governors until January 2028.
Can the president fire the Federal Reserve chair?
Unlike other government agencies, the Fed has a lot of independence from Congress and the White House, the Congressional Research Service said in a January report.
According to the report, economists have justified the independence, saying that decisions about monetary policy shouldn’t be influenced by political pressures. To ensure Fed accountability, the chair testifies before Congress, much like other government agencies.
The Fed chair can be removed “for cause by the President”, according to the law. This refers to “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office”, according to a Supreme Court decision about the Federal Trade Commission.
In May, the Supreme Court ruled on Trump’s authority to fire members of two different independent agencies. In its 6-3 ruling, the Court granted the Trump administration’s emergency request to fire the heads of the agencies while the case over the legality of firing them played out in the courts.
In its opinion, the Supreme Court addressed the Fed, saying its ruling didn’t affect the agency.
“The Federal Reserve is a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity that follows in the distinct historical tradition of the First and Second Banks of the United States,” the Supreme Court said.
Some legal experts question the legality of Trump firing Powell. Any move to oust him would likely end up in the courts.
Peter Conti-Brown, a professor of financial regulation at the University of Pennsylvania, said the Fed’s building renovation costs aren’t “cause” for Powell’s dismissal.
“There is no factual basis to support any conclusion that the cost overruns on the renovation project constitute anything like fraud or gross negligence,” Conti-Brown said. “Had Powell committed fraud, in this context or any other, there could well be a case for his removal.”
Conti-Brown said that Trump has long talked about wanting Powell’s removal. A court may consider Trump citing the renovation’s budget as “pretext” for his firing – a legal term used to describe a false reason an employer gives for firing an employee in order to cover the real reason, Conti-Brown said.
“Courts evaluating any attempted removal after the fact will assess both the animus and pretext very heavily against President Trump,” Conti-Brown said.
However, it is unclear how courts would react because “this is uncharted legal territory”, Jeremy Kress, a former Fed banking regulator who is a faculty director of the University of Michigan’s Center on Finance, Law and Policy, told The New York Times.
Lev Menand, a legal scholar at Columbia University, agreed with Kress.
“In normal times, I would say Powell wins 10 times out of 10,” Menand told The New York Times. “But these aren’t normal times, because this court has shown that it is willing to look the other way when the president engages in illegal conduct and it is willing to construe the president’s power under the Constitution as so broad as to allow the president to flout laws.”
World
Takeaways from AP’s report on the ICE detention center holding children and parents
Many Americans were alarmed recently when immigration officers in Minneapolis took custody of a 5-year-old boy and sent him and his father to a Texas detention center. But he was no outlier.
The government has been holding hundreds of children and their parents at the Dilley Immigration Processing Center, about 75 miles south of San Antonio. Some have been detained for months.
The Department of Homeland Security has strongly defended the quality of care and conditions there.
Here are key findings from an Associated Press report on how the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement is shaping life inside the facility.
Detention of children has been rising
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement booked more than 3,800 children into detention during the first nine months of the new Trump administration, according to an AP analysis of data from the University of California, Berkeley’s Deportation Data Project.
On an average day, more than 220 children were being held, with most of those detained longer than 24 hours sent to Dilley. More than half of Dilley detainees during the early part of the Trump administration were children, the AP analysis found.
Since being reopened last spring, the number of people detained at Dilley has risen sharply and reached more than 1,300 in late January, according to researchers. Nearly two-thirds of children detained by ICE in the early months of the Trump administration were eventually deported.
ICE holds many children longer than 20-day limit
The government is holding many children at Dilley well beyond the 20-day limit set by a longstanding court order.
“We’ve started to use 100 days as a benchmark because so many children are exceeding 20 days,” said Leecia Welch, the chief legal director at Children’s Rights, who visits Dilley regularly to ensure compliance. In a visit this month, Welch said she counted more than 30 children who had been held for over 100 days.
Many settled families among those currently detained
When the Obama administration opened Dilley in 2014, nearly all the families detained there had recently crossed the border from Mexico.
But many of those now sent to the facility have lived in the U.S. several years, according to lawyers and other observers, meaning children are being uprooted from the familiarity of schools, neighborhoods and many of the people who care for them.
Parents Allege Deficient Care
Parents and children recounted stressful conditions inside Dilley, including experiences that raise questions about the quality of care being provided.
A 13-year-old girl cut herself with a plastic knife after staff withheld prescribed antidepressants and denied her request to join her mother down the hall, the mother told the AP.
Another mother said when her 1-year-old daughter developed a high fever and vomited, medical staff repeatedly offered only acetaminophen and ibuprofen before she was eventually admitted to hospitals with bronchitis, pneumonia and stomach viruses. ICE disputed her account, saying the baby “immediately received proper care.”
Other families described more routine problems, like the difficulty of getting children to sleep in quarters where lights are kept on all night and of stomach aches caused by foul drinking water.
Both adults and children described the often overwhelming stress of being detained that has caused many to despair.
ICE, DHS defend Dilley
DHS did not respond to detailed questions about Dilley submitted by the AP. But both DHS and ICE sharply refuted allegations of poor care and conditions in statements issued this week.
“The Dilley facility is a family residential center designed specifically to house family units in a safe, structured and appropriate environment,” ICE Director Todd M. Lyons said in a statement.
Dilley provides medical screenings and infant care packages as well as classrooms and recreational spaces, ICE said.
Once in full operation, Dilley is expected to generate about $180 million in annual revenue for CoreCivic, the for-profit prison company that operates it under contract with ICE, according to the company’s recent filing with securities regulators.
In response to questions from the AP, a CoreCivic spokesman said no child at Dilley “has been denied medical treatment or experienced a delayed medical assessment.” The company said detainees receive comprehensive care from medical and mental health professionals.
Questions about oversight
The increased detention of families comes as the Trump administration has gutted an office responsible for oversight of conditions inside Dilley and other facilities.
In years past, investigators found problems at Dilley, including consistently inadequate staffing and disregard for the trauma caused by the detention.
A special committee recommended that family detention be discontinued except in rare cases, and the Biden administration began phasing it out in 2021. Dilley was closed in 2024. But in reopening it, the Trump administration has completely reversed course.
World
World leaders split over military action as US-Israel strike Iran in coordinated operation
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
World leaders reacted swiftly Saturday after the United States and Israel launched strikes on Iran, exposing a deep divide between governments backing the attack on Iran and those warning the attacks risk a wider regional war.
In a joint statement, Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney and Foreign Minister Anita Anand voiced firm support saying, “Canada supports the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent its regime from further threatening international peace and security.” The statement described Iran as “the principal source of instability and terror throughout the Middle East” and stressed it “must never be allowed to obtain or develop nuclear weapons.”
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese also endorsed the action, writing on X, “Australia stands with the brave people of Iran in their struggle against oppression.” He confirmed Australia supports “the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” while activating emergency consular measures and urging Australians to leave Iran if safe.
The United Kingdom said Iran “must never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon.” U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s office said he was speaking with the leaders of France and Germany “as part of a series of calls with allies.”
A person holds an image of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as Iranian demonstrators protest against the U.S.-Israeli strikes, in Tehran, Iran, Feb. 28, 2026. (Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) )
French President Emmanuel Macron warned, “The outbreak of war between the United States, Israel and Iran carries grave consequences for international peace and security.” He added, “The ongoing escalation is dangerous for all. It must stop,” and called for an urgent meeting of the United Nations Security Council.
In a joint statement, the leaders of France, Germany and the United Kingdom also said they had “consistently urged the Iranian regime to end Iran’s nuclear program, curb its ballistic missile program, refrain from its destabilizing activity in the region and our homelands, and to cease the appalling violence and repression against its own people.”
The three governments said they “did not participate in these strikes,” but remain “in close contact with our international partners, including the United States, Israel, and partners in the region.”
They reiterated their “commitment to regional stability and to the protection of civilian life,” condemned “Iranian attacks on countries in the region in the strongest terms,” and called for a “resumption of negotiations,” urging Iran’s leadership to seek a negotiated solution. “Ultimately, the Iranian people must be allowed to determine their future,” the statement said.
European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas described developments as “perilous,” saying Iran’s “ballistic missile and nuclear programmes… pose a serious threat to global security,” while emphasizing that “Protection of civilians and international humanitarian law is a priority.”
Spain openly rejected the strikes. Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said, “We reject the unilateral military action by the United States and Israel, which represents an escalation and contributes to a more uncertain and hostile international order.”
Meanwhile, Gulf states responded to reported Iranian missile activity.
Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Ministry said, “The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia condemns and denounces in strongest terms the blatant Iranian aggression and the flagrant violation of the sovereignty of the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, and Jordan.” It affirmed “its full solidarity with and unwavering support for the brotherly countries” and warned of “grave consequences resulting from the continued violation of states’ sovereignty and the principles of international law.”
The United Arab Emirates’ Ministry of Defense said the country “was subjected to a blatant attack involving Iranian ballistic missiles,” adding that air defense systems “successfully intercepted a number of missiles.” Authorities said falling debris in a residential area caused “one civilian death of an asian nationality” and material damage.
The ministry called the attack “a dangerous escalation and a cowardly act that threatens the safety of civilians and undermines stability,” and stated the UAE “reserves its full right to respond.”
UN’S ATOMIC AGENCY’S IRAN POLICY GETS MIXED REVIEWS FROM EXPERTS AFTER US-ISRAEL ‘OBLITERATE’ NUCLEAR SITES
Smoke rises after reported Iranian missile attacks, following strikes by the United States and Israel against Iran, in Manama, Bahrain, Feb. 28, 2026. (Reuters)
Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry said Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Mohammad Ishaq Dar “strongly condemned the unwarranted attacks against Iran” and called for “urgent resumption of diplomacy.”
China also weighed in. A spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, wrote on X that Beijing is “highly concerned over the military strikes against Iran launched by the U.S. and Israel.” He added that “Iran’s sovereignty, security and territorial integrity should be respected” and called for “an immediate stop of the military actions” and “no further escalation.”
Turkey’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan held calls with counterparts across the region, a Turkish Foreign Ministry source told Reuters. The discussions focused on “possible steps to be taken to help bring an end to the attacks.”
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy directly linked the developments to Russia’s war against his country.
“Although Ukrainians never threatened Iran, the Iranian regime chose to become Putin’s accomplice and supplied him with ‘shahed’ drones,” Zelenskyy wrote, adding that Russia has used “more than 57,000 shahed-type attack drones against the Ukrainian people.”
“It is important that the United States is acting decisively,” he said. “Whenever there is American resolve, global criminals weaken.”
Russia sharply criticized the operation. Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, said, “All negotiations with Iran are a cover operation.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
An interception is visible in the sky over Haifa during the latest barrage. (Anthony Hershko/TPS-IL)
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam warned, “We will not accept anyone dragging the country into adventures that threaten its security and unity.”
Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide said the strike “is not in line with international law.”
Reuters contributed to this report.
World
Israel strikes two schools in Iran, killing more than 50 people
State media says Israeli attack on girls’ school in the city of Minab in the south of the country kills dozens.
Published On 28 Feb 2026
An Israeli strike has hit an elementary girls’ school in Minab, a city in the Hormozgan province of southern Iran, killing at least 53 people, according to state media, as the immediate civilian cost from Israel and the United States’ huge bombardment of Iran comes into sharper focus.
Workers are continuing to clear wreckage from the site, where 63 others have been injured on Saturday, said Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency. The strike is part of a wave of joint US-Israeli military attacks across Iran that has triggered an outbreak of regional violence.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi shared a photo of the attack, which he said destroyed the girls’ school and killed “innocent children”.
“These crimes against the Iranian People will not go unanswered,” Araghchi wrote in a post on X.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baqaei also slammed the “blatant crime” and urged action from the United Nations Security Council.
Separately, Iran’s Mehr news agency reported that at least two students were killed by another Israeli attack that hit a school east of the capital, Tehran.
Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Mohammed Vall said the attacks call into question US and Israeli claims that “they are targeting only military targets and they are trying to punish the regime, not the people of Iran.”
“President Trump has promised the Iranian people that aid or help is coming their way, but now we are seeing civilian casualties; that’s something that the Iranian government will stress as a case of violation of international law and an aggression against the Iranian people, ” said Vall.
There was no immediate reaction from the US or Israel on Iran’s claims about the school strikes.
The last time the US and Iran waged attacks on Iran in June 2025, sparking the 12-day war, the civilian toll in Iran was also heavy.
According to Iran’s Ministry of Health and Medical Education, thousands of civilians were killed or injured, and public infrastructure was damaged, during that conflict.
-
World3 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts3 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Louisiana5 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Denver, CO3 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT