“If something goes wrong, there shouldn’t be multiple deaths. I should be the only one.”The Latest News from the UK and Around the World | Sky News
Month: August 2025
There will be no red carpet or fly past, no round of applause when Volodymyr Zelenskyy arrives in Washington DC on Monday.The Latest News from the UK and Around the World | Sky News
Sanctuary cities in the United States, which limit local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, have drawn the ire of President Donald Trump during both of his administrations.
Border czar Tom Homan said in July 2025 that the Trump administration would target sanctuary cities across the country and “flood the zone” with agents from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to pursue deportation goals.
I am a historian of migration. I have found that the concept of sanctuary takes many forms, from gestures of kindness and advocacy to more formal approaches such as churches protecting migrants at risk of arrest and deportation.
In the U.S., sanctuary city policies have historically been designed to support undocumented immigrants and refugees, especially those facing deportation. Ordinances based on these policies are often used by local authorities to signal the need for substantive immigration reform.
New public sanctuary policies
Today’s sanctuary practices, and the federal targeting of sanctuary cities, are largely the result of the way sanctuary took shape across the U.S. in the 1980s.
During this period, churches, city officials and activists assisted migrants fleeing the violent conditions created by U.S. proxy wars in El Salvador, Nicaragua and Guatemala.
In the early 1980s, migrants arriving in the U.S. confronted restrictive asylum processes. To a large extent, this was the result of the Reagan administration’s refusal to acknowledge the extent of human rights violations perpetrated by U.S.-supported regimes in Central America.
In 1984, the federal government approved less than 3% of U.S. asylum claims by applicants who had fled El Salvador and Guatemala. By comparison, asylum claims were approved for over 30% – and in some cases, 60% – of refugees from Iran, Afghanistan and Poland.
In response, U.S. activists and church and city leaders began to advocate on behalf of refugees from Central America. They sought to effect change at home and abroad, eventually coalescing into what became known as the Sanctuary Movement.
This largely decentralized coalition focused on protecting refugees by providing safe housing, often in churches, and advocating for their right to seek asylum. And they engaged in public outreach to raise awareness about the conditions in Central America and the U.S. government’s role in conflicts there.
The goal was to change U.S. policy. As one sanctuary worker in Texas said in 1985, according to accounts compiled at the Benson Latin American Collection at the University of Texas at Austin: “Sanctuary offers a way, by which folks can, number one, be safe from the fear of death, and, number two, speak out as to what is really going on in Central America.”
Walt Frerck/AFP/Getty Images
The Sanctuary Movement also led to organized visits to the U.S.-Mexico border to witness the ways in which migrants were being treated by U.S. immigration officials. In Texas between 1983 and 1985, for instance, people were invited to document the activities of immigration officials at Port Isabel Detention Center.
Members of the Sanctuary Movement also shared some of the horrors they learned about from missionaries and refugees arriving from Central America, according to accounts in the Benson Latin American Collection.
As a member of the Rio Grande Border Witness group conveyed, according to records preserved in the Benson Latin American Collection, there were repeated stories out of Central America “of women being raped and stabbed” and “of fathers being murdered in front of their families.”
As awareness about violence in Central America increased, more people and congregations in the U.S. became involved in the Sanctuary Movement. At its peak in 1986, the movement included 300 churches that endorsed sanctuary for Central American migrants and the principles underpinning the Sanctuary Movement.
Public and symbolic
It was during this peak that U.S. cities first began making sanctuary declarations and later passed binding ordinances.
In 1985, Berkeley, California, which had previously declared itself a sanctuary city for conscientious objectors to the Vietnam War, made one of the first sanctuary city declarations on behalf of refugees from Central America. Its resolution reaffirmed the city’s “support for the principle of sanctuary and for those groups which engage in this time-honored tradition of humanitarian assistance.”
City officials said that no city employee would “violate the established sanctuaries by assisting in investigations, public or clandestine, by engaging in or assisting with arrests for alleged violation of immigration laws by the refugees in the sanctuaries or by those offering sanctuary.”
AP Photo/Olga Fedorova
Cities such as San Francisco and Santa Fe, New Mexico, followed with declarations or binding ordinances. These initiatives were often specifically crafted for migrants from Central America and contained critiques of U.S. foreign policy and asylum policy.
A 1989 San Francisco ordinance, which is still in effect, was inspired by the notion that the U.S. had special obligations to the citizens of El Salvador and Guatemala because of its role in the conflicts there.
There was powerful rhetoric and symbolism in the sanctuary city resolutions passed in the 1980s. This holds true for the present, as sanctuary declarations and policies have become increasingly polarizing in today’s political climate.
Moreover, as I note in my own work, public acts of sanctuary can come at a cost, often at the expense of the very people they are meant to help. In an effort to raise public awareness and sympathy, those in need of refuge often have their most harrowing moments laid bare for public consumption.
The Sanctuary Movement that began in the 1980s, in part to protest U.S. support for repressive governments, has endured for more than 40 years as an expression of concern for and solidarity with immigrants who come to the U.S.
The question now is how the movement will evolve in the face of the Trump administration’s threats.
Some sanctuary city leaders, such as Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, have responded by pointing to the value of policies that foster community trust and help keep all residents safe. How other leaders and communities respond remains to be seen.
Laura Madokoro receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) and the Fonds de Recherches de Québec Société et Culture (FRQSC).
Politics + Society – The Conversation
Thousands of Afghans living in the United States face an uncertain future after a federal appeals court ruled on July 21, 2025, that the Trump administration can end a humanitarian relief program that provided them work permits and protection from deportation.
The program, temporary protected status, known as TPS, grants legal status to people from certain foreign countries who are already in the U.S. and have fled armed conflict or natural disasters. It’s usually granted for 18 months, with an option of an extension.
About 8,000 Afghans and 7,900 Cameroonians benefiting from this humanitarian protection were affected by the May 2025 decision from the administration to terminate TPS.
Afghans in the U.S. first received TPS in 2022, after the Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan in late 2021.
The Taliban enforce a repressive interpretation of Islamic law that includes banning women and girls from attending school or working outside their home. The Taliban emerged in the early 1990s and controlled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. They were overthrown after the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 but regained control in 2021 after the withdrawal of U.S. and NATO forces.
In 2023, the Department of Homeland Security extended TPS for Afghans through 2025, as the conditions that triggered the initial designation – namely, armed conflict in Afghanistan – were deemed to be ongoing.
In May 2025, however, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem announced the termination of TPS for Afghans, stating that Afghanistan no longer poses a threat to the safety of its nationals abroad and that Afghan nationals can safely return to their country.
“We’ve reviewed the conditions in Afghanistan with our interagency partners, and they do not meet the requirements for a TPS designation,” Noem said in May 2025. “Afghanistan has had an improved security situation, and its stabilizing economy no longer prevent them from returning to their home country.”
Most Afghans who have arrived in the U.S. since 2021 share a fear of persecution by the Taliban. That includes people who worked for the former government, advocated for women’s rights or worked with the U.S. military in Afghanistan.
As a migration policy scholar, I believe the cancellation of TPS for these Afghans won’t lead to voluntary repatriation, as the fear of persecution by the Taliban remains a serious concern for many. Instead, it will likely force thousands of people into unlawful residency in the U.S. That, in turn, would not only leave thousands at risk of deportation but limit their employment opportunities in the U.S. and keep them from financially supporting the families they left behind in Afghanistan.
US asylum process
Unlawful U.S. residency can disqualify Afghans from accessing benefits such as Medicaid and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, a federal program that provides cash assistance and support services to low-income families with children.
For Afghan TPS holders without any other pending legal status – such as asylum claims, for example – the termination also means the loss of work authorization, as their employment authorization document was tied to having TPS. This can cut off thousands of Afghans from financial stability, according to the nonprofit group Global Refuge.
Many Afghans are likely to seek alternative legal pathways to remain in the U.S., most commonly through the already underresourced asylum process. For these people, the outlook looks daunting. Filing an asylum application with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services means joining an unprecedented backlog.
Wakil Kohsar/AFP via Getty Images
At the end of 2024, nearly 1.5 million asylum applications were pending with USCIS, according to the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy organization. Most applicants faced estimated wait times of up to six years for a decision.
Asylum applicants are allowed to remain in the U.S. while their application is pending. And they can apply for work authorization, but only after the asylum application has been pending for at least 150 days. However, the work authorization is not issued until a minimum of 180 days has passed since filing for asylum.
So Afghan nationals applying for asylum following the TPS termination face a mandatory six-month period without legal work authorization. This period can stretch even longer, depending on how long it takes applicants to retain an attorney and complete the complex application process.
Financial lifelines
Like many forcibly displaced populations, Afghans often arrive in the U.S. with extremely limited financial resources.
Forced migration is typically abrupt and unplanned, leaving little opportunity to liquidate assets or withdraw funds. The small amount of cash or valuables that this population manages to carry is often just enough to reach immediate safety.
Against this background, the ability to work is a critical issue for Afghans in the U.S. Most Afghans in the U.S. are also supporting older parents and immediate or extended family members in Afghanistan, according to unpublished research I’m conducting with my colleagues, Proscovia Nabunya and Nhial Tutlam. This makes timely access to legal employment not only a matter of survival for themselves but also a lifeline for loved ones left behind.
TPS was never intended as a long-term solution. And the number of Afghan nationals who held it as their sole legal status in the U.S. was relatively small – estimated at around 8,000 – compared with the over 180,000 Afghans who have arrived in the U.S. since 2021.
What is more concerning for Afghans in the U.S., however, are the government’s assertions surrounding the termination of TPS for this group. If the U.S. government now maintains that Afghanistan is safe for return, it raises concerns about how this stance may influence the adjudication of Afghan asylum claims.
Although most Afghan asylum applications are grounded in a combination of factors – fears based on nationality, ethnicity, religion and political opinion – labeling Afghanistan as safe for return could undermine claims that rely on nationality as a central basis for protection.
Mitra Naseh does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Politics + Society – The Conversation
Reading Time: 3 minutes
Earlier this week, Netflix shared new details about the second season of Meghan Markle’s lifestyle show.
We already knew that With Love, Meghan had been renewed, but now we know which of the host’s celebrity friends will be joining her in the kitchen.
And one of guest star is already stirring up controversy among the duchess’s fan base.
Presence of Chrissy Teigen leaves fans baffled, infuriated
While the season is set to feature such big names as chef David Chang and Queer Eye star Tan France, some fans were disappointed by the lack of star power in the trailer.
And quite a few were upset that Meghan is still buddying up to Chrissy Teigen, whose behavior on social media has become a source of controversy in recent years.
“Netflix releases the trailer for Meghan Markle’s Second Season ‘With Love, Meghan’ to air on August 26th. My takeaway, no celebrities except bully Chrissy Tiegen! No Serena, Oprah, Beyonce or even Astronaut Gayle King,” wrote one user on X, according to Page Six.
“Meghan Markle and @Netflix in MAJOR PROBLEM WITH CHRISSY TEIGEN and Teigen’s #cyberbullying, causing a child to want to leave her body,” another added, referring to Chrissy’s bullying of Courtney Stodden.
Stodden was in her teens at the time, and she recently revealed that she nearly took her own life because of Teigen’s online harassment.
“Meghan Markle hanging out with Chrissy Teigen makes absolute sense to me,” another user wrote.
“How can Meghan Markle associate with Chrissy Teigen, a self confessed online bully and troll when she purports to support the Parents Network who are campaigning against this very thing?” a fourth chimed in.
Did Meghan make a major misstep by inviting Chrissy on her show?
As several critics have pointed out, Meghan has been campaigning against bullying for years.
It’s a cause that’s near and dear to her heart, owing to the harassment she endured in the early days of her marriage to Prince Harry.
Chrissy has cooled it on the online trash talk, and she issued a public apology to Courtney, but Stodden rejected the peace offering as an insincere attempt to create a less damaging narrative.
So inviting Chrissy on her show when her previous controversies are not fully resolved is definitely an odd look for Meghan.
It’s unlikely that she’ll pull the episode at this point, but she’s might be regretting such a major PR misstep.
Chrissy and Meghan go way back, but after years of declining popularity, the Duchess of Sussex is likely well aware that the last thing she needs is another controversy.
Meghan Markle Fans Furious That ‘Bully’ Chrissy Teigen Will Appear on Her Show was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.
The Hollywood Gossip
Reading Time: 3 minutes
Brandi Glanville has had her life turned upside down.
At times, it feels like her disfigured face has been turned upside down.
Her mystery ailment has ravaged her with pain and mounting debt.
Between paying out of pocket to doctors and her DIY attempts, things are sounding desperate.
Brandi Glanville had ‘never felt suicidal before’
Speaking in a lengthy interview with Us Weekly, Brandi Glanville is opening up about how she has not felt “normal” in two years.
“I’ve never felt suicidal before, [but earlier this summer], I didn’t want to be here,” she admitted.
“And if it [weren’t] for my kids,” Brandi continued, “I don’t know that I would be here.”
Brandi then described the bitter circumstances of the Ultimate Girls Trip incident in Morocco.
“Almost immediately upon landing, my phone started blowing up about these articles that were incorrect and not true about what happened in Morocco with Caroline,” she recalled.
“And I immediately took on a ton of anxiety.”
Brandi continued: “And I was just trying to get my head around what was happening and why it was happening. I was on the couch in a fetal position for four months.”
‘It’s insane’
By the time that Brandi Glanville had begun to socialize again, she noticed “crazy lumps” developing on her face.
“My face started, like, moving around and doing things. I started to lose my eyesight in my left eye. It’s insane,” she described.
“At first, my face was blowing up and getting really swollen,” Brandi explained.
“Then it started sinking in, and I felt like something was just eating me from the inside. I’m like, ‘It’s eating my flesh.’”
As she continued, Brandi cited symptoms like gray spots on her “sunken-in” face and a strange, harmful fluid that oozes out of her left ear or drains into her mouth.
As horrific as all of this is, the worst enemies of any sick American — health insurance providers — were no help. This has meant that the RHOBH alum has had to pay at least $130,000 out of pocket.
“They didn’t believe me,” Brandi lamented.
“My insurance was like, ‘Nothing’s wrong with you. It’s just inflammation and old filler.’”
Medical debts on top of being largely unable to work feel like a sick joke
“I’m paying the minimum on my credit cards. I’ve exhausted my savings. At my age, I feel like such a loser in a way, because I was taking care of everything,” Brandi confessed.
“I was together. I had great credit. Now I’m scared about every little thing.”
She pointed out that “medical bills are the No. 1 cause of bankruptcy” in the United States. She’s right.
“I stay in this house every day. I’m paying crazy amounts of rent,” Brandi described.
She continued: “I’m worrying about money all day long. I have brain fog. I get one thing done a day, and I’m just frazzled.”
Brandi Glanville Felt Suicidal as Facial Disfigurement Ravages Her Life and Puts Her … was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.
The Hollywood Gossip
Reading Time: 3 minutes
Sophie Turner isn’t quite a homewrecker … but she did play a role in ending an A-list celebrity engagement.
How? All with a wave of her hand, more or less.
Despite her own painful divorce, the beloved actress is finding the humor in what sounds like a very awkward time.
She didn’t ask to be the downfall of this once-serious relationship. But here’s how it all played out. …
Sophie Turner ended a relationship with a wave of her hand (sort of)
As a guest on the Thursday, August 14 episode of Late Night With Seth Meyers, Sophie Turner shared the unexpected role that she played in
This went down at a San Diego Comic-Con afterparty a few years ago.
According to the actress, the “quite crazy” evening “went really south really quick” after a longtime friend asked her to do her a solid.
“She saw this actor she loved,” Sophie shared. Her friend urged her to say hello to the actor, which was a simple enough request. Sophie obliged, waving to the man from across the room.
“That was it,” she emphasized. That was it for the interaction — but not, she explained, for the evening.
“Later on, I see this girl looking at me and she’s a famous actress,” Sophie shared vaguely.
“And I go, ‘I have to go and tell her how much she means to me.’”
‘Can you stop flirting with my fiance?’
According to Sophie Turner, she opted to “dance on over” to the woman.
However, the stare did not result in a warm reception.
The woman — apparently an A-list actress — demanded: “Can you stop f–king flirting with my fiance?”
Sophie did not know who the fiance might be.
The woman pointed, indicating the actor at whom she had waved earlier in the evening.
“I have no idea who this man is,” Sophie freely acknowledged.
Her longtime friend’s actor crush sounds a little less A-list than his girlfriend. Well, ex-girlfriend, now.
“Turns out, they broke their engagement off that night because of my [wave],” she shared.
Sophie commented: “I didn’t realize I held this power.”
This could happen to anyone, unfortunately
Truth be told, you don’t have to be a gorgeous, Emmy-nominated, internationally beloved actress to “break up” a relationship through innocuous friendliness. This can happen to anyone.
The reason that this happens is basically never because of the third party.
Instead, a couple has preexisting issues — perhaps infidelity or insecurity or lack of trust, or all three, or more. A friendly smile or farewell hug from someone else is just a catalyst that helps them end a relationship that isn’t really making them happy.
Sophie Turner didn’t break them up. But hopefully they’re both happier and more secure in new relationships.
Sophie Turner Accidentally Broke Up an A-List Celebrity Engagement? Not On Purpose, She … was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.
The Hollywood Gossip
Reading Time: 3 minutes
Tom Cruise has been in the news a lot lately, largely due to his budding romance with Ana de Armas.
But now, the Mission: Impossible star is making headlines for a very different reason.
And while Tom usually eschews politics in order to keep the public’s focus on his movies (and stunts), his latest action might place him squarely in the center of the nation’s never-ending hyper-partisan family feud.
Did Tom Cruise just publicly snub Donald Trump?
Every year, the Kennedy Center honors several Americans for their cultural contributions.
A medal from the organization is considered one of the highest honors an artist or entertainer can receive, and this year’s honorees include George Strait, KISS, Michael Crawford, Gloria Gaynor, and Sylvester Stallone.
But despite an offer from the White House, Tom Cruise will not be on hand to receive an award when the annual ceremony takes place in December.
According to a report from The Washington Post, Cruise has declined to be among the first group of Kennedy Center nominees for Trump’s second term.
Unnamed Kennedy Center employees say that the screen legend turned the offer down due to “scheduling conflicts.”
Of course, that’s the excuse celebs always give when they don’t want to attend an event. And the ceremony — which is still several months away — would only require a couple hours of Cruise’s time.
The politicization of the Kennedy Center honors
In the past, the Kennedy Center was a mostly apolitical organization. But nothing is apolitical in 2025.
Trump announced his intention to take over operations of the Kennedy Center shortly after taking office for his second term.
And in the months since, he’s proceeded to do exactly that.
In fact, Trump intends to host this year’s ceremony, an unprecedented move for a sitting president.
Trump became chairman of the Kennedy Center Committee back in February, and he says he took a hands-on approach to selecting this year’s honorees.
“I would say I was about 98 percent involved. They all went through me,” the president said, per the Post.
“I had a couple of wokesters. Now, we have great people. This is very different than it used to be, very different.”
The Post also quotes Trump as saying he always wanted an award from the Kennedy Center, but “was never able to get one.”
“I waited and waited and waited, and I said, ‘The hell with it, I’ll become chairman and I’ll give myself an honor,’” he continued, adding, “Next year, we’ll honor Trump, okay?”
We may never know for sure why Cruise opted out of any involvement in this year’s awards.
But we’re guessing that December’s presentation ceremony will be unlike any other in Kennedy Center history.
Tom Cruise Turns Down Kennedy Center Honor From Trump White House: Why? was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.
The Hollywood Gossip
Categories
Logan Paul & Nina Agdal: Married!
Reading Time: 3 minutes
The Paul family just got a little bigger!
Logan Paul and longtime partner Nina Agdal are officially man and wife after tying the knot in Lake Como, Italy today.
The couple exchanged vows in the same place that Logan popped the question in 2023.
Logan and Nina tie the knot in lavish ceremony
Logan announced the engagement in July of that year, writing, “Engaged to my best friend” on his Instagram page.
The small ceremony was attended by the couple’s 10-month-old daughter, as well as Logan’s famous younger brother, Jake Paul.
“I’ve seriously been crying,” Jake wrote in an Instagram Story about the wedding, according to People magazine.
This is the first marriage for both Paul and Agdal, a supermodel who previously dated such A-listers as Leonardo DiCaprio, Joe Jonas, and Adam Levine.
A relationship that’s played out in the public eye
Logan, of course, lives his life in the spotlight, so his 27 million Instagram followers already know a great deal about his relationship.
“Today is the day I ask the love of my life to marry me,” the influencer told fans in 2023 before he popped the question.
“Fourteen months ago, I fell in love with the most beautiful human being I’ve ever seen in my life, and I have been waiting for this day ever since.”
Just over a year later, the couple shared the news of their daughter’s birth.
“Esmé Agdal Paul has entered the chat,” Paul and Agdal captioned a joint Instagram post on Sept. 29, 2024.
“I’m no longer my first priority,” he told People shortly after Esme’s birth.
“It’s made me less selfish. Prior to Nina, I was No. 1 in my life. Now with Esmé, my daughter, I’ve dropped two rungs down the priority ladder. It’s Esme, Nina, those are interchangeable — then me. So for the first time in my life, I’m not my first concern. I would die for these women.”
“He has actually gotten more motivated, I would almost say. He’s working really hard, he wants to show her that she can do anything,” Agdal added.
“He’s obviously a softy with her, he loves her so much. But he’s become very dedicated to pursuing even bigger dreams.”
The couple seemed certain of their staying power from the very beginning, posting, “2022, the beginning of me and you” at the time of their first date.
Our sincere congratulations go out to Logan and Nina on this joyous occasion.
Logan Paul & Nina Agdal: Married! was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.
The Hollywood Gossip
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott immediately called another special session to pass a new congressional map, after the first attempt failed due to Texas Democrats leaving the state to deny Republicans the ability to carve out additional GOP seats.
When Speaker Dustin Burrows gaveled into the second special session, which began just two hours after the first one wrapped, he announced that the chamber yet again did not meet quorum, thanks to Democrats remaining out of state to protest the redraw. President Donald Trump ordered Texas Republicans to extract five more seats in Congress to increase the odds that Republicans retain the House in the midterms.
Abbott’s proclamation was largely the same as the first one, which lays out 19 agenda items, including redistricting and disaster relief for Central Texas flood victims.
“Delinquent House Democrats ran away from their responsibility to pass crucial legislation to benefit the lives of Texans,” the Republican governor said in a statement. “We will not back down from this fight. That’s why I am calling them back today to finish the job.”
Most Texas Democrats on the lam are stationed in Illinois but the stalemate appears to be winding down, with the House Democratic Caucus setting conditions for their return.
Burrows said he expects the House will reach quorum on Monday — and sent members in attendance home for the weekend. But he warned out-of-state Democrats that if they returned to Texas before session resumes next week, they would be subject to civil arrest by state law enforcement.
“Those who have refused to make quorum, I’m sure you’re missing home,” Burrows said. “Do not think you have permission to return to Texas and enjoy a peaceful weekend before finally showing up to work.”
Politics