Igor Golovniov/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — Some Verizon customers were experiencing a service outage on Wednesday afternoon, according to the company.
Verizon said it was not immediately clear how long the service would be down.
“We are aware of an issue impacting wireless voice and data services for some customers,” Verizon said in a statement to ABC News. “Our engineers are engaged and are working to identify and solve the issue quickly. We understand how important reliable connectivity is and apologize for the inconvenience.”
Many Verizon customers said on social media that their phones showed “SOS” in place of network bars.
According to Downdetector at least 175,000 Verizon customers were affected at one point, but that number has since gone down. Downdetector, a site that tracks outages, said Verizon customers began noticing interrupted service around noon Eastern time.
New York Emergency Management (NYCEM) officials said the outage is affecting some users calling 911.
“Verizon is working to solve the issue,” NYCEM said in a statement. “If you have an emergency and cannot connect using your Verizon Wireless device, please call using a device from another carrier, a landline, or go to a police precinct or fire station to report the emergency. In the meantime, you can check the website or social media account of your cellphone carrier for updates.”
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg arrives to the Los Angeles Superior Court at United States Court House on February 18, 2026 in Los Angeles, California. (Jill Connelly/Getty Images)
(LOS ANGELES) — A landmark trial over social media addiction has drawn fresh scrutiny to a decades-old legal shield: Section 230.
The case, which began last Monday in Los Angeles County Superior Court, centers on claims against Meta — the parent company of Facebook and Instagram — and YouTube, which is owned by Google. Plaintiffs argue the companies knowingly built features that encouraged compulsive use among young users, contributing to long-term mental health harm.
The case is the first of more than 1,500 similar lawsuits nationwide to go before a jury, potentially setting a precedent for how tech companies could be held liable for product design. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is testifying in the case on Wednesday.
The companies deny the allegations, arguing that mental health outcomes are shaped by a range of factors beyond social media use. They say they have implemented safeguards aimed at protecting young users, including parental controls and accounts designed specifically for teens.
In a statement to ABC News at the start of the trial, a Meta spokesperson said, “We strongly disagree with these allegations and are confident the evidence will show our longstanding commitment to supporting young people.”
Meta said that the company has made “meaningful changes” to its services, such as introducing accounts specifically for teenage users.
The tech giants are expected to challenge the plaintiff’s argument that there is a direct link between social media use and mental health issues. They may also invoke legal protection long-afforded by Section 230.
Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act protects social media platforms and other sites from legal liability that could result from content posted by users because they are not deemed to be publishers.
Plaintiffs have sought to circumvent that legal immunity in part by arguing that the platforms are addictive, which amounts to a defect in a product.
Section 230 grants broad protection for internet platforms, saying: “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”
Some tech giants, like Meta and Google, have supported reform of Section 230 that would raise the standard that platforms would need to meet in order to qualify for immunity. But the companies largely support preserving the law in some form to protect them from legal liability tied to user-generated content.
Section 230 has garnered backing from some free-speech advocacy groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). The measure “protects internet users’ speech by protecting the online intermediaries we rely on,” EFF said in a blog post last week, praising Section 230 as “the legal support that sustains the internet as we know it.”
In 2023, the Supreme Court issued a pair of rulings that upheld Section 230, rejecting challenges from users alleging that harm had resulted from online posts.
One of the cases, Gonzalez v. Google LLC, concerned a lawsuit brought by the family of Nohemi Gonzalez, an American woman who was killed in an ISIS terrorist attack in Paris in 2015. The lawsuit against Google, the parent company of YouTube, alleged that YouTube recommended ISIS recruitment videos to users. The high court ruled against the plaintiffs.
Many Democrats argue that Section 230 allows platforms to evade accountability for allegedly permitting harmful or misleading content, claiming the rule lets platforms off the hook for policing too little speech.
Republicans have taken issue with what they consider big tech censorship, saying the legal protection allows the platforms to police too much speech without facing consequences.
In December, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., introduced the Sunset Section 230 Act, which would remove the legal protection from federal law within two years. A bipartisan group of seven senators has signed onto the bill but it remains well short of a majority.
ABC News’ Shafiq Najib contributed to this report.
A large vinyl decal displaying the official circular logo of the European Parliament, along with the full blue and yellow starred flag of the European Union, is affixed to the glass curtain wall of the institution’s building in Brussels, Belgium, on December 16, 2025. Michael Nguyen/NurPhoto via Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — European lawmakers on Wednesday suspended a trade agreement with the United States over tariff threats issued by President Donald Trump as part of his push to acquire Greenland.
The announcement came minutes after President Donald Trump reasserted his call for U.S. ownership of Greenland during a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
The speech followed tariff threats issued by Trump days earlier against seven European Union countries, plus the U.K., over the issue.
European leaders, meanwhile, have pushed back on Trump’s ambitions. Greenland is a self-governing territory of the Kingdom of Denmark, a member of the EU.
Members of the Committee on International Trade (INTA) – a body within the European Parliament – hold “unshakable commitment to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Denmark and Greenland,” European Parliament member Bernd Lange, an INTA chair on EU-US trade relations, said in a statement on Wednesday.
“By threatening the territorial integrity and sovereignty of an E.U. member state and by using tariffs as a coercive instrument, the U.S. is undermining the stability and predictability of EU-US trade relations,” Lange added.
The EU and US struck the trade agreement in July, moving to ratchet down tariffs on European goods and restore stability to the commercial relationship. At the time, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the agreement “creates certainty in uncertain times.”
On Wednesday, Lange said the E.U. would pause the ratification process in response to Trump’s proposed tariffs. Under Trump’s plan, eight European nations – including Denmark, France, Germany and the United Kingdom – will be slapped with 10% tariffs beginning on Feb. 1. Those levies are set to escalate to 25% on June 1, Trump said.
In his speech on Wednesday, Trump ruled out use of the military in his push for Greenland. “We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won’t do that,” Trump said.
U.S. stocks slumped on Tuesday in response to the tariffs, with the Dow closing down 870 points, but recovered roughly half of those losses in a rally on Wednesday morning. In Europe, the pan-continental STOXX 600 index ticked slightly lower on Wednesday.
ABC News’ David Brennan contributed to this report.
President Donald Trump attends the signing ceremony of the Peace Charter for Gaza as part of the 56th World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland on January 22, 2026. (Harun Ozalp/Anadolu via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Mortgage rates whipsawed in recent weeks as markets reacted to a flurry of policies from the Trump administration.
It began with a major milestone. Mortgage rates earlier this month fell below 6% for the first time in nearly three years, according to a data released by Mortgage News Daily.
“The progress stems directly from President Trump’s aggressive agenda to restore the American Dream of homeownership,” the White House touted in a statement on Jan. 12. The Trump administration cited its announcement days earlier, calling on government-sponsored mortgage lenders to purchase $200 billion in mortgage-backed securities.
Within little more than a week, however, mortgage rates had climbed to 6.21%, responding to rattled bond markets and erasing the previous reduction. The uptick came as Trump issued a tariff threat to European allies over his demands to acquire Greenland at the time. When Trump backed off of that levy soon afterward, mortgage rates fell but remained above previous lows, Mortgage News Daily data showed.
The volatility in mortgage rates underscored the risks posed by recent trade tensions, which threaten to push up Treasury yields and, in turn, drive mortgage rates higher, some analysts told ABC News.
Still, they added, mortgage rates will likely face downward pressure this year from anticipated interest-rate cuts at the Federal Reserve, and Trump may take further steps of his own to reduce borrowing costs.
“President Trump is certainly not sitting back and doing nothing,” Susan Wachter, a professor of real estate at University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business, told ABC News.
“Some of it is big things on the international front, which are potentially destabilizing. And there’s an attempt to do anything and everything for the affordability of housing,” Wachter added.
To be sure, average 30-year mortgage rates have dropped from 7.08% to 6.17% since Trump took office, according to Mortgage News Daily. That drop-off owes in part to a post-pandemic cooldown of inflation, which allowed the Federal Reserve to begin lowering interst rates.
In a social media post earlier this month, Trump said lower mortgage rates would “make the cost of owning a home more affordable. It is one of my many steps in restoring Affordability.”
Mortgage rates closely track the yield on a 10-year Treasury bond. Since bonds pay a given investor a fixed amount each year, the specter of inflation risks higher prices that would eat away at those annual payouts. In turn, bonds often become less attractive in response to economic turmoil. When demand falls, bond yields rise.
U.S. Treasury yields jumped last week in the aftermath of Trump’s tariff threat over Greenland, which appeared to presage a possible trade war with several European allies.
The 10-year Treasury yield climbed as high as 4.3% in the aftermath of Trump’s threat, before dropping steadily down to 4.21% as Trump withdrew the levy and backed negotiations over Greenland, MarketWatch data showed.
As tensions rose in response to Trump’s tariff threat, some major U.S. bondholders in Europe appeared poised to sell. A Danish pension fund, AkademikerPension, said last Tuesday it would unload U.S. treasuries by the end of the month. It remains unclear whether other European bondholders will follow suit, especially after Trump’s reversal on tariffs.
If a substantial share of U.S. bondholders were to sell off their assets, it would slash demand and push up bond yields, some analysts said.
Since 30-year mortgage rates and other key interest rates track the yield on 10-year treasury bonds, a selloff of treasuries could bring about higher monthly payments for home loans, Raymond Robertson, a professor of trade, economics and public policy at Texas A&M University, told ABC News.
“It’s a pretty big concern,” Robertson said.
Marc Norman, associate dean at the New York University School of Professional Studies and Schack Institute of Real Estate, said bondholders are evaluating the reliability of U.S. government debt.
“Basically, it’s a bet on the U.S. government,” Norman told ABC News. “If that becomes unstable and people lose trust, it could have a big effect.”
Despite the uptick in mortgage rates in recent weeks, borrowing costs for homebuyers remain markedly lower than where they stood a year ago.
Analysts attributed the drop to a series of interest rate cuts at the Fed, as well as Trump’s order calling on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to buy hundreds of billions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities. After the order, Bill Pulte, the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, instructed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to up their bond investments in an effort to put downward pressure on mortgage rates, the Associated Press reported last week.
By ordering a federal agency to buy up some mortgage-backed securities, the Trump administration helped increased demand for the underlying loans, which pushed bond yields lower, Wachter said.
“This mortgage bond proposal is not a big move but it makes a difference,” Wachter added. Wachter said she expects mortgage rates to fall further over the course of this year, though she acknowledged ongoing risk: “Investors don’t like uncertainty.”
Still, Wachter said, “If you’re looking to buy a home, today is as good a day as any.”
If homebuyers move forward with a purchase but later find that mortgage rates have continued to fall, they can opt to refinance their homes. “The old saying is, ‘You marry the home and you date the mortgage,'” Wachter said.
