Supreme Court rules in favor of Army veteran wounded in suicide attack
The US Supreme Court in Washington, DC, US, on Monday, April 20, 2026. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled in favor of a U.S. Army veteran wounded in a 2016 suicide bombing in Afghanistan, allowing him to sue a military contractor for damages after it allegedly failed to supervise the attacker who was an employee.
The 6-3 decision reverses lower court rulings which had said the contractor, Fluor Corporation, was immune from lawsuits because it was operating on behalf of the U.S. government and opens the door to other damages suits against war-zone contractors for activities outside the bounds of their responsibility.
The attacker, Ahmad Nayeb, was employed by Fluor to work in a nontactical vehicle yard on Bagram Air Base under an Army contract that required the company to ensure all personnel complied with base security policies, which included their confinement to works sites and “constant view of them.”
In November 2016, Nayeb roamed the base freely for nearly an hour and used U.S. government tools to make his bomb inside the secure base, according to an Army investigation cited in court documents.
The explosion killed five and wounded 17, including then-Army Spc. Winston Hencely, who confronted the attacker just as he detonated his suicide vest. Nayeb was killed; the explosion fractured Hencely’s skull and resulted in permanent disability.
While damages claims against the U.S. government and its military contractors arising out of combatant activities are generally prohibited by federal law, Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the court’s majority, concluded immunity does not apply to cases when “the contractor was not required or authorized to take the action at issue.”
“The government required Fluor to hire Afghan employees and to provide logistics for Bagram Airfield. But, it did not, Hencely contends, require Fluor to leave Nayeb unsupervised, allow him to walk alone for an hour after his shift, or permit him to obtain unauthorized tools with which he could build a bomb,” Thomas wrote.
The decision clears the way for Hencely to pursue a damages case against the company in federal court.
In dissent, Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts said while they believe Hencely deserves “a full measure of support from the American people,” a damages lawsuit is “not the way to give the petitioner what he is due.”
Alito wrote, “War is the exclusive domain of the Federal Government, but the Court [today] allows state (or foreign law) to encroach on that domain. The Constitution precludes that encroachment.”
Fluor Corp, which disputes liability for the bombing, did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment on the court’s decision.
ICE agents leave a residence after knocking on the door on January 28, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security continues its immigration enforcement operations after two high-profile killings by federal agents in recent weeks. (Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — In the weeks after federal agents killed two U.S. citizens in Minnesota during a surge to apprehend undocumented immigrants for deportation, Americans oppose Immigration and Customs Enforcement tactics by wide margins and President Donald Trump’s approval on immigration has dipped to the lowest of his second term, according to an ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll conducted using Ipsos’ KnowledgePanel.
Trump’s immigration rating hits new low for second term
Trump, who has focused much of his second term on the immigration crackdown, is now 18 percentage points underwater in how Americans rate his handling of immigration — with 58% disapproving and 40% approving — the worst ratings he has had on immigration in his second term, ticking down from his October ratings and almost exactly where he was in July 2019 when 40% approved and 57% disapproved of how he was handling the issue.
Despite his increasingly negative ratings on handling immigration since taking office, Americans don’t trust Democrats to handle the issue more. When asked who they trust to do a better job handling immigration, 38% say they trust Trump more, 34% trust congressional Democrats more and 24% trust neither.
And even though he’s underwater on handling immigration overall, Trump’s ratings on handling the immigration situation at the U.S.-Mexico border are a bit better, albeit still slightly negative, with 47% of Americans approving of how he is handling the situation at the border and 50% disapproving.
Americans on deportations and ICE
Americans are roughly split over whether the federal government should deport all undocumented immigrants living in the United States, but a growing share oppose expanded ICE operations — and by a 2-to-1 margin, they oppose ICE’s tactics.
The results come following the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, an ICU nurse, by federal agents in Minneapolis on Jan. 24 — just weeks after the fatal shooting of Renee Good, a mother of three, by an ICE agent in Minneapolis on Jan. 7.
Half (50%) of Americans support the federal government deporting the about 14 million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. and sending them back to their home countries while 48% oppose this.
Support was even higher for deporting all undocumented immigrants ahead of the 2024 presidential election, when 56% of Americans supported sending all undocumented immigrants to their home countries. By last February that dipped to 51%.
Most Hispanic (64%), Black (58%) and Asian and Pacific Islander Americans (56%) oppose deporting all undocumented immigrants while 58% of white people support widespread deportation.
Even if many Americans want mass deportations, 58% say Trump is going “too far” in deporting undocumented immigrants, up from 50% who said the same in October. Just 12% say he is “not going far enough” and 28% say he is “handling it about right.”
Seven in 10 Americans do not think most immigrants deported since January 2025 were violent criminals, including 33% who say “hardly any” of those deported were. Only 7% of Americans say “nearly all” of the immigrants who were deported since the beginning of the Trump administration were violent criminals.
A slim majority of Americans oppose ICE’s expanded operations to detain and deport undocumented immigrants in the U.S., 53% now, up from 46% in October.
Opinion breaks down on partisan lines, with 88% of Democrats opposed to ICE’s expanded operations and 81% of Republicans in support. A 56% majority of independents oppose ICE’s expanded operations.
By a 2-to-1 margin, Americans oppose the tactics ICE is using to enforce immigration laws, 62% to 31%. Half of Americans strongly oppose ICE’s tactics, including 89% of Democrats and 53% of independents. Only 4 in 10 Republicans strongly support the tactics ICE is using to enforce immigration law, rising to over half among MAGA Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who call themselves MAGA.
By a 13-point margin, Americans oppose abolishing ICE, 50% to 37%. Opinions are polarized: 7 in 10 Democrats support abolishing ICE, while 8 in 10 Republicans oppose it. More independents oppose abolishing ICE (45%) than support abolishing ICE (35%), with 2 in 10 independents saying they have no opinion on the issue.
ICE was established in 2003 as part of the Homeland Security Act following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Previously, the Immigration and Naturalization Service under the Justice Department administered immigration laws. The Abolish ICE political movement gained national attention in 2018 during the previous Trump administration’s family-separation policy.
An ICE memo issued in May gave federal agents the authority to enter the homes of people suspected of being in the U.S. illegally without warrants signed by judges. A wide majority of Americans — including majorities across party lines — say that when federal law enforcement wants to forcibly enter someone’s home, they need to get approval from a judge; just 20% say getting approval from a federal agency is enough.
How Americans feel about Minnesota and personal impacts
Most Americans (54%) say they are either upset (17%) or angry (37%) over how immigration enforcement has gone in Minnesota, with 72% of Democrats saying they are angry. More than 4 in 10 Americans say they are “not concerned” or “concerned but not upset” over the situation in Minnesota.
Nearly half of Republicans, 47%, say they are not concerned over immigration enforcement in Minnesota, along with 32% who say they are concerned but not upset.
And while majorities of Asian and Pacific Islander (66%), Hispanic (59%) and Black Americans (61%) say they are upset or angry about how immigration enforcement has gone in Minnesota, that dips to 49% among white people.
There is a personal connection for many Americans — 42% say they are at least somewhat concerned that federal immigration enforcement agents could arrest or detain someone they know, including 33% who say they are at least somewhat concerned this could happen to a close family member or friend.
Hispanic (60%), Black (55%) and Asian and Pacific Islander Americans (53%) are all more concerned that federal immigration agents could arrest and detain a close friend, family member or someone else they know than white people (32%).
Replacing Kristi Noem, sanctuary cities and the border
By almost a 2-to-1 margin, Americans support replacing DHS Secretary Kristi Noem amid the administration’s controversial immigration enforcement tactics, 44% to 23%, with 33% voicing no opinion on the matter.
Democrats are more aligned on replacing Noem than Republicans are. Three-quarters of Democrats support removing Noem, 7% oppose it and 18% have no opinion. Among Republicans, 45% oppose replacing Noem, 15% support it and a large 40% say they have no opinion on the matter. Among independents, 45% support Noem’s removal, 17% oppose it and 38% have no opinion.
By an 8-point margin, Americans oppose denying federal funds to so-called sanctuary cities that limit their cooperation with ICE, 46% to 38%. Eight in 10 Democrats oppose this, over 7 in 10 Republicans support it.
Methodology — This ABC News-Washington Post-Ipsos poll was conducted via the probability-based Ipsos KnowledgePanel, Feb. 12-17, 2026, among 2,589 U.S. adults and has an overall margin of error of plus or minus 2 percentage points. The error margins are larger among partisan group subsamples.
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, in Washington, March 10, 2026. (Petty Officer 1st Class Eric Brann/DoD)
(WASHINGTON) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Tuesday said the U.S. will end its war with Iran “on our timeline” and “at our choosing” amid mixed messaging from the administration on the timing of the operation and its ultimate objective.
Hegseth notably declined to give a further assessment on how much longer the military campaign will last, saying Tuesday would be the most intense day of strikes yet in the 11-day conflict and that it will be up to President Donald Trump to decide when the war is over.
“The president has set a very specific mission to accomplish, and our job is to unrelentingly deliver that,” Hegseth told reporters at a Pentagon press briefing.
“Now he gets to control the throttle. He’s the one deciding. He’s the one elected on behalf of the American people when we’re achieving those objectives. And so, it’s not for me to posit whether it’s the beginning, the middle or the end. That’s his. And he’ll continue to communicate that,” the defense secretary said.
Trump himself has made conflicting statements on the matter.
Trump told CBS News on Monday afternoon that the war is “very complete, pretty much.” But around that time, the Defense Department’s rapid response social media account posted on X: “We have Only Just Begun to Fight.”
ABC News White House Correspondent Selina Wang pressed Trump later Monday evening at a news conference: “So, which is it and how long should Americans be preparing for this war to last for?”
“Well, I think you can say both. The beginning — it’s the beginning of building a new country, but they certainly, they have no navy, they have no air force, they have no anti-aircraft equipment,” Trump said.
“We could call it a tremendous success right now. As we leave here, I could call it. Or we could go further and we’re going to go further,” the president added.
Trump said on Monday he thinks the war will be over “very soon” and repeatedly called the war a “short-term excursion.”
Trump and his top officials have outlined four objectives of the military offensive: destroy Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities; annihilate their Navy; ensure they can never obtain a nuclear weapon; and prevent the Iranian regime from arming and funding terrorism outside its borders. But broader goals on what comes after the fighting ends remains unclear.
Trump’s signaled he could declare the military campaign a success at any time, even as the Iranian regime remains in power and Iran still maintains its enriched uranium stockpile. Trump’s repeatedly said Iran cannot be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon — and over the weekend said he was not ruling out the possible use of U.S. ground troops in Iran, but said that they would be used only “for a very good reason.”
The president has also sent mixed messages on regime change, and how involved the U.S. intends to be in what new leadership will take control in Tehran.
Trump expressed disappointment in the selection of Mojtaba Khamenei, the 56-year-old son of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed in a U.S.-Israeli strike at the beginning of the war.
In a phone interview with ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce on Sunday, Trump said the new leader is “going to have to get approval from us.”
“If he doesn’t get approval from us he’s not going to last long. We want to make sure that we don’t have to go back every 10 years, when you don’t have a president like me that’s not going to do it,” Trump told ABC.
Hegseth, though, on Tuesday vowed the U.S. would not be involved in “mission creep.”
“This is not endless. It’s not protracted,” Hegseth said.
“This is not 2003. This is not endless nation-building … Those days are dead. Instead, we’re winning decisively with brutal efficiency, total air dominance, and an unbreakable will to accomplish the president’s objectives,” Hegseth said.
Paratroopers assigned to 2nd Battalion, 82nd Airborne Division conduct live fire exercises at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, July 28, 2025. (Spc Jayreliz Batista Prado/US Army, File)
(WASHINGTON) — Elements of the 82nd Airborne Division are poised to deploy to the Middle East, amid the U.S. and Israel’s war with Iran, according to a source familiar with the situation.
The deployment is set to include both a headquarters unit and ground combat forces. A headquarters company, around 250 personnel, would handle logistics, coordination and operational planning for the deployment.
One brigade — about 3,000 soldiers — of the 82nd is constantly on standby as the Immediate Response Force, tasked to be able to deploy anywhere in the world within 18 hours.
It remains unclear how many combat troops would ultimately be mobilized — or what role they would play in a potential conflict with Iran. Any move to introduce U.S. ground forces would mark a significant escalation, opening the door to a far broader and more complex phase of the war.
President Donald Trump has repeatedly said that the U.S. has effectively won the war and that Iran’s military is nearly annihilated. But strikes against U.S. troops in neighboring countries has continued. So far, 13 U.S. troops have been killed in action and at least 290 have been wounded.
“I don’t like to say this. We’ve won this — this war has been won,” Trump told reporters Tuesday.
So far, 13 U.S. troops have been killed in action and at least 290 have been wounded.
The 82nd Airborne Division is the Pentagon’s premier ground force, designed to deploy on short notice anywhere in the world and trained in parachute assaults to quickly seize contested terrain — though that doesn’t mean that’s how they could be deployed into the Middle East.
Signs of a potential deployment have been building for weeks. Earlier this month, the same 82nd Airborne headquarters unit was suddenly pulled from a significant training event at Fort Polk, Louisiana, three U.S. officials told ABC News, fueling speculation the division was being prepared to deploy to the Middle East.
The 82nd, which is based out of Fort Bragg, North Carolina, could join the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) as potential ground forces swell into the region. A MEU is a 2,200-troop force which is expected to arrive in the Middle East this week.
Experts say the MEU would likely be used to conduct raids across the Iranian shoreline to gain a foothold in areas around the crucial Strait of Hormuz, through which about 20% of the world’s oil flows by ship.
And three Navy ships carrying 2,200 Marines left San Diego last week for a previously scheduled deployment to the Indo-Pacific, but two U.S. officials tell ABC News their ultimate destination is likely the Middle East.
The 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit is aboard the USS Boxer, the USS Comstock and the USS Portland — along with 2,000 sailors.
