Duke Energy announced Monday that Joyce Mullen will join its board of directors, effective immediately. Mullen will serve on the Audit Committee and the Operations and Nuclear Oversight Committee. She retired in April as president and chief executive of Insight Enterprises, a technology services firm that supports business, government and educational institutions. Prior to Insight, Mullen spent 21 years at Dell Technologies in supply chain, delivery and logistics roles, and held leadership positions at Cummins Engine Co. She also currently serves on the board of The Toro Co. In a statement, Harry Sideris, president and chief executive of Duke Energy, said Mullen’s experience as a transformative leader will help the company accelerate its vision for the future of energy. Ted Craver, independent chair of Duke’s board, said the company is pleased to add a proven executive with expertise in AI, digital innovation and customer-focused execution. Duke Energy serves approximately 8.7 million customers across the South, with operations in Indiana, Ohio and Florida, where about 2 million customers reside. The company also provides natural gas service.

White House attorney Todd Blanche told ABC News on Sunday that the administration’s decision to bar CNN, MSNBC and Politico from the White House press pool was based on the view that access is a privilege rather than a right.

Blanche, speaking during the second week of a dispute over credentialing, said the outlets were excluded beginning September 19 because they had provided reporting he described as inaccurate and overly negative toward President Trump. He declined to cite specific articles, stating only that "any negative reporting about the president must be inaccurate."

The comment came after a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order on Thursday requiring the White House to restore the affected journalists’ credentials for 14 days. On Saturday, CNN reported that its reporters were again denied permission to travel with the president on Air Force One.

Blanche argued that the selection of pool participants is routinely decided by the administration, noting that "it’s common every time the president travels that he and his team decide which reporters get to travel with the president."

The practice of determining pool access shifted to White House control after Trump returned to office, whereas previously the White House Correspondents’ Association and broadcast networks had managed the rotation. Critics say the change has increased access for outlets that regularly produce favorable coverage of the administration.

In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly found no evidence that the revocation of credentials was motivated by national security concerns, noting that Trump’s public statements focused on the outlets’ alleged lack of truthfulness rather than security implications.

A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll shows Trump’s overall approval rating at 32%, the lowest of his presidency, while a 2025 Gallup survey found only 28% of Americans express a great deal or fair amount of trust in news media to report fully and accurately.

Former President Bill Clinton referenced the tension between press access and censorship during a 2026 summit, saying he had considered banning the White House press corps but ultimately respected constitutional limits.

When asked about the First Amendment, Blanche said the Constitution guarantees a free press the right to report, but that access to the White House remains a privilege the administration may condition.

He added that ensuring the public receives accurate information is the president’s responsibility.

ICE enforcement actions have recently intersected with political vulnerability in multiple states, drawing attention to the operational and social impacts of immigration enforcement. In Kansas, a series of ICE operations across four rural towns prompted business closures and school safety concerns, with local officials urging families to identify caregivers in case parents were detained. Senator Roger Marshall, a Republican facing a competitive re-election bid, publicly criticized ICE for insufficient coordination with local authorities, stating he had contacted Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin to address the disruptions. Marshall emphasized the need for community safety measures to be implemented responsibly.

Mullin, who assumed leadership of the Department of Homeland Security in March, has overseen a period marked by record-high arrest numbers despite efforts to recalibrate enforcement visibility. While DHS has framed recent actions as part of a historic deportation initiative aligned with presidential priorities, local responses have varied. In Ford County, Kansas, GOP Party Chair Scott Fischer described the situation as disruptive to community stability, noting that the presence of ICE activity has created uncertainty for residents and businesses.

The broader implications of ICE operations extend beyond immediate enforcement. In Texas, a nonfatal shooting involving a Venezuelan individual in Austin contributed to sustained media coverage of enforcement actions, while in Maine, the fatal shooting of a 25-year-old Colombian national has remained a point of discussion in Senator Susan Collins’ re-election campaign. In Florida, a Republican incumbent has aired Spanish-language advertisements critiquing the administration’s approach, reflecting shifting political dynamics around immigration policy.

Business communities have also voiced concerns. The Kansas Livestock Association, representing agricultural producers, highlighted the indirect economic effects of enforcement actions, particularly on workers essential to supply chains. CEO Matt Teagarden noted that while illegal activity should be addressed, the methods employed have created a chilling effect among documented laborers. Similar sentiments were expressed in South Florida, where business leaders reported declining sales amid heightened enforcement and public scrutiny.

Political responses have been mixed. Senator John Cornyn of Texas acknowledged voter concerns about enforcement overreach, suggesting that the administration may have misjudged public tolerance for current tactics. In Texas’ 15th District, Democratic candidate Bobby Pulido reported increasing demand for immigration-related assistance, though his campaign lacks resources to meet all requests. His opponent, Representative Monica De La Cruz, has sought to distinguish her stance by emphasizing support for legal immigration processes and targeted enforcement against criminal elements.

In Maine, Senator Troy Jackson has centered his campaign on the death of Duran Guerrero, a Colombian national killed during an ICE-related encounter, using the case to critique Collins’ record on immigration funding. Collins, in response, has highlighted her support for procedural safeguards such as body camera implementation and de-escalation training for ICE personnel.

DHS has maintained that enforcement actions target individuals violating immigration law, including those with criminal histories or removal orders. A departmental statement affirmed that operations are carried out in accordance with congressional mandates and do not discriminate in enforcement locations. However, questions have arisen regarding transparency, particularly after reports that body camera footage was unavailable following the Austin incident. Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina expressed concern that such gaps undermine public accountability, even among some Republican allies.

Public opinion on mass deportation efforts remains divided. A POLITICO poll indicated that nearly half of U.S. adults view the current campaign as overly aggressive, while a minority consider it appropriately calibrated. Among voters prioritizing economic issues, enforcement activities have emerged as a secondary concern, particularly in sectors reliant on immigrant labor.

These developments underscore the complex interplay between federal enforcement actions and local political realities, particularly in swing states and districts where demographic shifts and economic dependencies intersect with broader debates over immigration policy.

Public pressure in Ireland has intensified ahead of a scheduled soccer match against Israel, with advocacy groups and citizens urging a boycott over the Israeli government’s military actions in Gaza. A recent United Nations report concluded that Israel’s conduct in Gaza constitutes genocide, fueling demonstrations and calls for the game to be canceled. The match, part of the UEFA Nations League, will be held at Nagyerdei Stadium in Debrecen, Hungary, after UEFA barred Israel from hosting home fixtures on its soil due to security concerns since October 2023. Israel is expected to field fewer than 100 supporters, most residing in Hungary, while the stadium holds approximately 20,000 spectators. Ireland’s home fixture against Israel was originally set for October 4 at TSC Arena in Bačka Topola, Serbia, but will be played without fans. Despite widespread opposition, the Irish national team players voted to proceed with the match following internal discussions. The games carry added significance, as both teams’ results influence qualification prospects for the 2028 UEFA European Championship, which Ireland will co-host. In response to the controversy, Irish players plan to wear black armbands during the match to honor lives lost in the conflict and have opted out of traditional pre-match rituals, including the handshake and pennant exchange. Goalkeeper Gavin Bazunu cited personal ethics in withdrawing from the squad, stating his opposition is directed solely at the violence in Gaza and not at Israeli or Jewish communities. Over 100 protesters gathered outside the team’s Dublin hotel, and more than 160 Irish athletes signed an open letter urging the soccer association to reconsider participation. Amnesty International’s Europe director criticized the match as incompatible with solidarity for Palestinians, noting Israel’s football association has ties to illegal settlements. Ireland’s football manager, Heimir Hallgrímsson, framed the match as a contest against “genocide,” not against Israel itself, a stance condemned by Israel’s soccer association as “hypocrisy and stupidity.” The association’s historical roots as the Palestine Football Association, established in the 1920s, have been cited in commentary on the broader political dimensions of the sport. While Irish Prime Minister Micheál Martin supported the decision to play, citing the separation of sport and politics, lawmaker Ruth Coppinger of the Socialist Party argued that engaging with a team linked to alleged atrocities is indefensible. The situation reflects a broader pattern of international sports events becoming entangled with geopolitical conflict, as seen in UEFA’s suspension of Russia following its invasion of Ukraine. Penalties for forfeiting matches, such as 3-0 walkover losses and modest fines, have been referenced in discussions about potential consequences for Ireland if it were to withdraw.

The United Nations ambassador to the United States, Mike Waltz, said Iran's proposal to end hostilities was turned down because negotiators appeared to demand concessions without offering reciprocal steps. Waltz echoed former President Donald Trump's assertion that Tehran sought relief from sanctions that have been imposed as part of a broader economic pressure campaign targeting Iran's maritime activities in the Strait of Hormuz. The blockade is intended to compel Iran to cease attacks on commercial vessels transiting the waterway.

Waltz told CNN's State of the Union that Iranian officials "were asking for everything up front with a promise that they would then talk," and that President Trump remained skeptical about whether Tehran was negotiating in good faith regarding its nuclear program. Trump had previously stated that Iran's overture, presented during the recent United Nations General Assembly session in New York, was motivated by desperation amid mounting economic strain. He claimed the United States was "winning tremendously" and maintained "total control" of the Strait of Hormuz.

In an interview with Axios, Trump indicated he anticipated additional diplomatic contacts with Iran in the coming week, but emphasized that any agreement would not align with U.S. expectations. "They want to make a deal, but it is not the deal that I want to make," he said, adding that Iran had "overplayed their hand."

Waltz referenced a previously negotiated memorandum of understanding, signed in Pakistan in June, which outlined a 14-point framework for a negotiated settlement. He noted that Iran allegedly breached the agreement by conducting attacks on international shipping, an act he described as violating international law. Approximately 146 countries have expressed support for condemning these actions.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated on social media that diplomatic engagement remains the only viable path to resolving the dispute with the United States and Israel. He emphasized that any reopening of the Strait of Hormuz would depend on the fulfillment of specific conditions. In an appearance on NBC's Meet the Press, Araghchi indicated that Iran was prepared to resume hostilities if necessary, while maintaining readiness for diplomatic efforts. "We are fully prepared for the war to be resumed," he said, "but we also stand ready for diplomacy. It is up to President Trump to choose."

President Masoud Pezeshkian, in an interview with CBS's Face the Nation, affirmed Iran's willingness to discuss its nuclear program and other matters, provided that negotiations occur without coercion. He reiterated that Iran does not seek conflict but would defend its interests against external pressure, and confirmed that the country has committed to not developing nuclear weapons.

Waltz also addressed intelligence reports suggesting Chinese assistance in targeting Iranian missile systems aimed at commercial shipping and U.S. military installations in the region. While he did not verify the leaked assessments, he noted that President Trump had raised concerns about this issue during discussions with Chinese Premier Xi Jinping, including during Xi's recent visit to Washington, D.C. Trump had previously raised the matter during a trip to China in May.

Waltz indicated that both the United States and China had affirmed during high-level talks that Iran must not acquire nuclear weapons and must refrain from attacks on international shipping in shared waterways. He described this consensus as a significant development.

The ambassador rejected reports that the United States planned to resume military strikes against Iran following the November midterm elections. He emphasized that the administration's objective is to prevent the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps from obtaining nuclear capabilities, which he characterized as a threat to regional and global stability.

Araghchi, in his Meet the Press appearance, reiterated Iran's position that diplomatic solutions remain possible, though the country retains the capacity to respond to further aggression. "We stand firm in the face of any new aggression," he said, "even if it comes to a doomsday war. At the same time, we stand ready for diplomacy. It is up to President Trump to choose."

The situation continues to involve complex diplomatic maneuvering, with Iran maintaining that its conditions for engagement must be met before any de-escalation can occur, while U.S. officials express skepticism about the sincerity of Iranian overtures.