Iran will be at the World Cup and will play in the US, FIFA boss says

(NEW YORK) — Officials in Louisiana reached a tentative $4.8 million settlement on Tuesday evening with the family of Ronald Greene, a 49-year-old Black motorist who died on May 10, 2019, after an encounter with Louisiana State Police, where he was beaten and shocked with stun guns following a high-speed vehicle chase.

A spokesperson for the Louisiana State Police confirmed to ABC News on Wednesday morning that a settlement, which was first reported by the Associated Press, has been reached over Greene’s death, but said that the terms cannot be discussed since the negotiations are ongoing.

“LSP is unable to discuss the terms of the settlement at this time, as the process has not yet been finalized,” LSP Public Affairs spokesperson Lt. Kate Stegall said.

Greene was pursued by police after failing to stop for an unspecified traffic violation, leading to a car chase near Monroe, Louisiana. Greene’s mother Mona Hardin said that authorities initially told the family that Greene died when his car crashed into a tree, but body camera footage released amid public pressure nearly two years after his death showed his violent encounter with police.

The settlement would resolve a federal wrongful death lawsuit filed in May 2020 by Greene’s family against the Louisiana State Police.

According to Louisiana state law, the settlement would need final approval from the state legislature before it is finalized.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(MINNEAPOLIS) — Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Thursday said that in the aftermath of the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on Saturday, federal officials issued public statements about the incident based on “the best information” they had at the time and “what we knew to be true on the ground.”

Noem previously suggested on the day of the shooting that the agents’ actions were justified, claiming at a press briefing that Pretti had “attacked” officers and was “wishing to inflict harm” on them. But appearing Thursday on Fox News, Noem offered no evidence to support such claims, saying instead that the scene was “chaotic.”

After her initial statements, Minnesota officials were quick to push back on her public comments, pointing to the multiple videos from witnesses which appeared to tell a different story.

She said the FBI is now leading the investigation, though officials previously said DHS was investigating, with assistance from the FBI.

Noem’s shift in tone comes amid growing criticism of how quickly officials characterized the shooting. Some critics told ABC News that issuing definitive conclusions following immigration enforcement shootings is “incredibly irresponsible” and may undermine the long-term credibility of federal agencies.

The critics warned that rushing to label suspects as “domestic terrorists” — as White House adviser Stephen Miller and Noem did in the aftermath of the shooting deaths of Alex Pretti and Renee Good — or declaring shootings justified before evidence is reviewed represents a departure from the norm.

“It’s just incredibly irresponsible to rush to conclusions,” said John Sandweg, the former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement during the Obama administration.  “When you have a senior adviser to the president and the cabinet secretary saying, ‘These are the facts, this is what happened’ … you’ve now undermined all the credibility and really made it impossible for the public to have confidence in that investigation.”

‘Public trust is everything’
An ABC News review of several recent incidents involving federal immigration agents found a consistent pattern: high-level officials publicized findings within hours of gunfire, only for those initial accounts to be challenged later by body camera footage, witness videos or court filings.

In at least five major cases, officials appeared to make public declarations about the incidents before formal investigations had reached final conclusions about those assertions.

“Public trust is everything to these agencies, and it just destroys them when you tell something that is so visibly and obviously contradicted by the video evidence,” Sandweg said.

Jason Houser, a former ICE chief of staff under the Biden administration, told ABC News that the rush to conclusions suggests the focus has shifted away from public safety toward a political narrative.

“It just shows that this is about the political debate. It’s not about actually arresting the most convicted criminals,” Houser said. “It should … create a lot of distrust that can tear at the core trust in law enforcement, especially federal law enforcement.”

In response to questions regarding the swiftness of the administration’s public comments and  the information released following major incidents, a DHS spokesperson said, “DHS follows proper legal processes and protocols for all statements disseminated by the Department.”

What Pretti video shows
In the shooting involving Pretti, DHS officials released a detailed statement just two and a half hours after the incident, claiming he “approached” officers with a handgun. Miller labeled Pretti a “domestic terrorist” and a “would-be assassin” on social media less than four hours after the gunfire.

Noem, during her Thursday interview, responded to critics on Capitol Hill calling for her resignation by stating she is “following the law, and enforcing the laws like President Trump promised he would do.”

Video analyzed by ABC News showed agents pinning Pretti down and removing a weapon from his waist before the shooting occurred — contradicting the initial claims from officials. Three days later, Miller issued a statement acknowledging that the initial DHS account was based on “reports from CBP on the ground” and suggested protocol may not have been followed.

“Any experienced law enforcement professional will understand that initial information coming from the scene of a major incident is usually flawed, so you have to sort of take it with a grain of salt,” said John Cohen, an ABC News contributor who served as acting DHS undersecretary for intelligence and analysis under the Biden administration.

During Thursday’s appearance on Fox News, Noem said, “We will continue to follow the investigation that the FBI is leading and give them all the information that they need to bring that to conclusion and make sure the American people know the truth of the situation,” she said.

After announcing on Friday that the Justice Department opened a civil rights investigation into the shooting Pretti, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told reporters that “a single video should not determine an entire investigation.”

“We have said repeatedly over the past week that of course this is something that we are investigating and that is what we would always do in circumstances like this,” Blanche said. 

Earlier shootings: Renee Good, Marimar Martinez
Following the shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis on Jan. 7, DHS issued a statement within two hours declaring that a “violent rioter” had “weaponized her vehicle” in an “act of domestic terrorism.” According to an ABC News analysis of verified video, Good can be seen turning her steering wheel to the right — away from the ICE agent — just over one second before the first of three gunshots was fired.

In October, less than four hours after Marimar Martinez was shot five times by a Border Patrol agent in Chicago, a DHS assistant secretary posted that law enforcement was “forced” to fire defensive shots. A DHS statement that day labeled Martinez and another individual “domestic terrorists,” while Noem later characterized the incident as a “ten-car caravan” that “ambushed” and “stalked” agents.

During court hearings, an attorney representing Martinez told the court that body-worn camera footage did not align with the government’s allegations. A federal judge later dismissed the indictment against Martinez after the Department of Justice abruptly filed a motion to withdraw the case.

That same month, in an incident in California, DHS issued a statement claiming that during a vehicle stop, an “unknown individual” attempted to “run officers over by reversing directly at them without stopping.” The statement asserted that an ICE officer, “fearing for his life, fired defensive shots.”

However, a lawyer for Carlos Jimenez told ABC News that after an agent pulled out pepper spray, Jimenez began to maneuver his vehicle “to get around” and was shot in his back shoulder through the back passenger window.

Chicago shooting
In another incident in September, an ICE officer shot and killed Silverio Villegas-Gonzalez outside Chicago. According to a lawsuit filed by the state of Illinois, Villegas-Gonzalez, a 38-year-old father, was driving home from dropping his three-year-old son at day care. A DHS statement issued hours after the shooting claimed an officer “fearing for his life” was “seriously injured.”

But the Illinois complaint and body camera video obtained by ABC owned station WLS-TV revealed the agent who fired the weapon described his own injuries as “nothing major.”

“Videos of the incident did not corroborate DHS’s assertion that the shooting officer was ‘seriously injured’ by a ‘criminal illegal alien,'” the lawsuit states.

Cohen, the former DHS official, noted that describing incidents as domestic terrorism before an investigation is complete could later be viewed in court as prejudicial.

“When you make commentary on these types of incidents to advance an ideological or political narrative or objective, you run the risk of putting out inaccurate information and as a result, losing the public’s confidence,” Cohen said.

Sandweg, the former ICE official, told ABC News the only responsible approach for officials is to remain restrained in their public statements until there is reliable information.

“The only approach is … ‘We’re aware, we are conducting a full investigation,'” Sandweg said. “Public trust … is everything to these agencies. Once you destroy that, it bleeds over into everything else they do.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The federal judge presiding over the White House ballroom case on Thursday clarified his ruling to say that security-related work can go on, particularly below ground, but that work on the ballroom itself still cannot proceed without authorization from lawmakers.

Judge Richard Leon ruled on March 31 that President Donald Trump can’t build the planned ballroom without authorization from Congress.

In addition to issuing Thursday’s clarification, Judge Leon stayed his ruling by another seven days to allow the White House to pursue further appeals.

The revised decision came at the direction of a D.C. Circuit appeals court panel, which ruled 2 to 1 last Saturday that Leon’s initial ruling needed to be clarified.

But in elaborating on the exceptions in his order, Leon also warned the Trump administration that security concerns are not a “blank check to proceed with otherwise unlawful activity,” saying that it is “neither a reasonable nor a correct reading” of his order for the White House to claim that the ballroom is itself part of a security upgrade, as it did in a recent court filing. 

“It is, to say the least, incredible, if not disingenuous, that Defendants now argue that my Order does not stop ballroom construction because of the safety-and-security exception!” Leon wrote.

Leon said his revised order would allow for “below-ground construction of national security facilities, work necessary to provide for presidential security, and construction necessary to protect and secure the White House and the construction site itself.”

Trump officials argued that items such as bulletproof windows, missile-resistant columns and drone-proof roofs — features of the planned ballroom — were necessary to enhance security of the executive mansion.

“While these features may well be beneficial, Defendants have not provided any national security justification for why these features must be installed immediately such that they should be excluded from the scope of the injunction,” Leon said, noting the appeals court panel’s own presumption that it would likely take months, if not years, for those upgrades to be completed.

Leon concluded his opinion by saying he has “no desire or intention to be dragooned into the role of construction manager,” and trusts that Trump and his aides will implement his ruling “in good faith and with the benefit of this clarification.”

Pointing to his latest stay, which is now set to expire next Thursday, Leon warned in a footnote that “any above-ground construction over the next seven days that is not in compliance with my Amended Order is at risk of being taken down pending the resolution of this case.”

The Trump administration filed a notice of appeal to the D.C. Circuit court following the judge’s revised order Thursday.

Trump also blasted Leon’s clarification in a social media post Thursday afternoon.

“This highly political Judge, and his illegal overreach, is out of control, and costing our Nation greatly,” Trump wrote.

Saying that the ballroom project will include “Bomb Shelters, a State of the Art Hospital and Medical Facilities, Protective Partitioning, Top Secret Military Installations, Structures, and Equipment, Protective Missile Resistant Steel, Columns, Roofs, and Beams, Drone Proof Ceilings and Roofs, Military Grade Venting, and Bullet, Ballistic, and Blast Proof Glass,” Trump claimed that Judge Leon’s ruling means that “no future President, living in the White House without this Ballroom, can ever be Safe and Secure at Events, Future Inaugurations, or Global Summits.”

The White House announced the construction of a 90,000-square foot ballroom in late July, and demolition began suddenly on the East Wing in late October when workers were spotted tearing down the wing of the White House.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation filed a lawsuit in December seeking to stop the ballroom construction until the project completes the standard federal review process and the administration seeks public comment on the proposed changes to the White House.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.