TSA's shoe-removal policy may be coming to an end
At a press conference at Washington Reagan Airport on Tuesday, Department of Homeland Security secretary Kristi Noem plans to announce a new policy "that will make screening easier for passengers, improve traveler satisfaction, and reduce wait times," according to a DHS media advisory.
The event is taking please on the heels of numerous reports, from travelers and the media, that the TSA has already stopped requiring flyers to remove shoes during screening, at least at some airports.
The TSA stopped short of confirming the change in a Monday evening email.
"TSA and DHS are always exploring new and innovative ways to enhance the passenger experience and our strong security posture," it said. "Any potential updates to our security process will be issued through official channels."
A 20-plus year policy
The shoe-removal policy formally took effect in 2006. In practice though, the screening procedure began at U.S. airports five years earlier, after British national Richard Ried attempted to detonate bombs in his shoes aboard an American Airlines flight.
The policy doesn't apply to members of the TSA Precheck program, children 12 and under and flyers 75 or older.
Many countries around the world have already abandoned shoes-off requirements as security screening technology has improved.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
White House advisor sends hard-nosed message to Apple
White House advisor sends hard-nosed message to Apple originally appeared on TheStreet. President Trump began a wild tariff ride when he started his second term. On April 2, Trump announced "reciprocal tariffs" on all countries not subject to other sanctions, and additional tariffs for 57 major trading partners were planned for April 9, but were later paused. Trump also imposed 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico, but later exempted products that were compliant with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. 💵💰 Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter💰💵 The United States and China reached an agreement in Geneva in May to temporarily slash tariffs in an effort to de-escalate the trade conflict between the two countries. The joint statement revealed the US will temporarily decrease its average tariffs on Chinese products from 145% to 20% and China will reduce its duties on American products from 125% to 10%. The pause on additional "reciprocal tariffs" was supposed to expire on July 9. However, on July 7, Trump extended the pause to August 1 while at the same time sending "tariff letters" to some countries, warning they would be subject to a new tariff rate if they didn't reach an agreement with the US by the new deadline. It appears that the on-again, off-again tariff situation has been best described by an asset management firm, Franklin Templeton: "Continued uncertainty appears to be the only certainty." Technology is one of the industries heavily impacted by trade wars. Among the many tech giants, one is gaining special attention tariff-wise: Apple. In February, the tech giant announced it plans to invest $500 billion in the United States, which was praised by Trump. In April, the government announced that certain electronics like smartphones and laptops would, at least temporarily, be excluded from the tariffs placed on China. However, officials have indicated that additional, sector-specific tariffs on electronics are to tariffs, Apple () made a major move: It shifted more of its iPhone production to India, reducing its reliance on China. In March, it shipped nearly $2 billion worth of iPhones to the US, a record amount for its two India-based suppliers. Shifting production to India provoked Trump, who wanted new tariffs to boost US production instead of moving production from China to other countries. "I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else," Trump wrote on Truth Social in May. "If that is not the case, a Tariff of at least 25% must be paid by Apple to the U.S." Later that same day, Trump explained that tariffs would not only impact Apple but also other tech companies such as Korea's Samsung. More Tech Stocks:More recently, White House trade advisor Peter Navarro commented on Apple's overseas production. During an interview on CNBC's "Squawk on the Street," Navarro went straight after Apple's CEO, saying: "Going back to the first Trump term, Tim Cook has continually asked for more time in order to move his factories out of China. I mean it's the longest-running soap opera in Silicon Valley." According to Navaro, Cook isn't moving manufacturing out of China quickly enough, writes CNBC."With all these new advanced manufacturing techniques and the way things are moving with AI and things like that, it's inconceivable to me that Tim Cook could not produce his iPhones elsewhere around the world and in this country," Navarro said. How complicated would it be to move iPhone production to the US, and what would be the consequences? Wedbush Securities Senior Analyst Dan Ives previously warned that moving Apple's manufacturing to the US could make an iPhone priced at around $3,500, probably making many people reluctant to even consider buying. The time it would take to relocate production is estimated to be five to 10 years. "We believe the concept of Apple producing iPhones in the U.S. is a fairy tale that is not feasible," Ives said, according to Barron' House advisor sends hard-nosed message to Apple first appeared on TheStreet on Jul 9, 2025 This story was originally reported by TheStreet on Jul 9, 2025, where it first appeared. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How Trump became the boy who cried wolf
For a brief moment on Tuesday, it looked as though Donald Trump was about to send financial markets haywire again in a re-run of the chaos that engulfed markets when he announced his 'liberation day' tariffs in April. US copper prices surged to record highs after the president pledged to impose 50pc tariffs on imports of the metal, which is used in a variety of electrical products. Yet hours later, American prices were in decline and copper on the benchmark London Metal Exchange had fallen. On Thursday, the London price was up 0.4pc after Mr Trump said his tariff on the metal would go into effect on August 1. The short-lived drama underlined a new reality in Mr Trump's trade war as investors start to see through his threats as simply crying wolf. Despite the president's best efforts, an eerie calm had descended upon trading floors. 'The market is no longer falling into the trap of the bravado that comes with some of the president's announcements,' said Darius McDermott, the managing director of broker Chelsea Financial Services. 'The market just doesn't believe it.' Traders have begun joking about what has become known as the 'Taco' trade – an acronym of 'Trump always chickens out' – each time the president makes an announcement. A case in point: on Monday, Trump sent his latest tariff letters to 14 countries, which extended the deadline for negotiations from Wednesday July 9 to Aug 1 and, a day later, promised to send out more letters to trading partners this week. The reaction? Rather than sparking panic, the FTSE 100 moved back towards record highs on Wednesday, while US stock markets opened higher again. Nvidia, the US-listed semiconductor giant, rose to become the world's first $4 trillion company on Wednesday. Michael Brown, an analyst at Pepperstone, said: 'Markets have, by and large, taken the latest round of Trump tariff threats in stride'. He added that the 14 letters and deadline extension were 'simply a negotiating gambit' aimed at 'speeding things along, escalating to de-escalate, and ensure deals get completed in shorter order'. On Tuesday, Mr Trump threatened to impose 200pc tariffs on the pharmaceutical sector – causing the market to shrug with indifference after he said drugmakers would get one year 'to get their act together'. AstraZeneca, the biggest company on the FTSE 100, initially made gains of 0.3pc on the London Stock Exchange, while rival GSK traded flat in afternoon trading. Mike Riddell, of Fidelity, said: 'What is incredible is how deaf markets seem to be to changes in US policy and what's announced around tariffs. 'Maybe it's just a reaction to what happened in April when there was mass panic and then it turned out that panic wasn't justified.' The S&P 500, the benchmark stock index on Wall Street, plunged by more than 12pc in the days after Mr Trump held up his board in the White House Rose Garden outlining his tariff plans against US trading partners. However, the index has surged by more than 25pc since then – touching new record highs at the start of this month. 'We don't actually know yet what is going to materialise in the end,' said Anna Rosenberg, of fund manager Amundi. 'The market reaction is so far contained because this is not the end of it. We know that this negotiation is going to go on for a long time. 'Everything that we're hearing today, the tariffs on copper, all of this being implemented is a negotiating tool to increase pressure on other countries to come to the table and agree to terms they would have found unacceptable under other circumstances.' Ms Rosenberg said another reason for the calmness was that trade pacts that have been signed by the US with the UK, Vietnam and China have not been finalised, meaning negotiations will continue. Although Britain has negotiated a partial tariff exemption for its car industry, ministers are still pursuing a deal to provide relief for the steel industry from Mr Trump's metal tariffs. 'So the reason the market isn't reacting more strongly is because we don't actually know what ultimately is going to materialise,' she added. 'Until that is clear, you're not going to see a more significant market reaction because it means we don't really know about the economic impact. There's a lot of uncertainty and, as a result, the market is just seeing through it for the time being.' Mr Riddell said markets everywhere were 'just pricing in peace and growth forever'. 'I think, if anything, the market reaction emboldens President Trump to be more aggressive on tariffs,' he said. This has raised concerns among some investors. Fidelity has been reducing its exposure to risky assets amid what it fears is 'massive complacency' from the market as a whole. Michael Nizard, of Edmond de Rothschild Asset Management, said the next tariff deadline on Aug 1 was 'shaping up to be a tipping point, not only for tariffs alone but for market trust in the global trade order'. 'It will raise a question of inflation risk. It will raise a question of credibility for the US dollar and, of course, the path of the economy.' Kevin Thozet, of asset manager Carmignac, said there were two ways to interpret the subdued recent market reaction. 'One is that markets are increasingly integrating, depending on whether you like Trump or not, the 'art of the deal' approach or the Taco trade. 'The other is that tariffs keep being pushed out and out and out. On copper, he said last night he would be signing an executive order. He hasn't signed it. Maybe markets are taking it with a pinch of salt.' Mr Thozet warned that retail investors risked getting burned. 'I do tend to think there is some form of complacency,' he said. 'What's led to this latest phase up in the market has been led by retail activity. 'Retail investors in the US hold as much as 30pc of Nvidia's market cap. Those market participants are not as valuation-sensitive as others. They push the trend up to or even overextend a trend, potentially. That's a scenario I think investors should be wary of.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Washington Post
24 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Democrats try to flip the script on red tape
Good morning, Early Birds. Are we really debating Superman's immigration status? Send tips to earlytips@ Thanks for waking up with us. In today's edition … Trump's fiction about gas prices … Democrats are already publicly angling in the 2028 presidential fight … Republicans in Congress are warming to a sanctions bill against Russia … but first … President Donald Trump's red-tape event in 2017 was not subtle: Stacks of paperwork. Large golden scissors. And a massive piece of red tape. The message was clear. Trump, a Republican who campaigned on ending regulatory burdens and cutting government regulations, was physically cutting red tape in office. 'The never-ending red tape in America has come to a sudden, screeching and beautiful halt,' Trump said. Trump's so-called Big Beautiful Bill, which the president signed into law earlier this month, does anything but that for many Americans — and Democrats have taken notice. 'It is doubling what you have to prove every year that you qualify for Medicaid. It is not just able-bodied adults who now have to do that much more or that much more often. … It is everyone,' said Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat who has led the charge against this additional paperwork. 'What you see in the projections are the expectations that people will make mistakes on double the paperwork and thus lose their coverage for a period.' Red tape and additional paperwork are central to this bill's attempt to cut the federal government's spending on Medicaid, the government health care program for a range of low-income Americans. Direct cuts to Medicaid benefits pose significant political risks for Republicans, and many have pledged not to support them. However, to cut the federal government's costs, the bill imposes a slate of additional paperwork on all Medicaid recipients, including stricter work requirements that require recipients to prove they are working and eligible for the program. As Michelle Miller-Adams and Beth C. Truesdale, researchers at the nonpartisan, nonprofit W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, put it: 'The reality is that requirements like these move people off programs not by requiring work but by requiring more reporting of work. Similar state-level policies have reduced the number of Medicaid recipients — but only by increasing the administrative burden on recipients, not by increasing the share who are employed.' The researchers noted that Arkansas implemented work requirements in 2018. While more than 95 percent of recipients either met the state's work requirement or qualified for an exemption, the required steps to prove so led to 17,000 individuals losing their Medicaid coverage. Republicans deny that the new requirements are merely a means to remove eligible people from Medicaid, arguing that verification requirements are a fair measure to protect the program. Kush Desai, a Trump spokesperson, said Democrats are 'either too disingenuous or too dumb' to differentiate between regulations on businesses and 'the current federal government ensuring that thousands of dollars' worth of taxpayer benefits meant for America's most vulnerable aren't being fraudulently funneled to illegal aliens or able-bodied adults.' But Democrats, like Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York), are rejecting that Republican view. 'They really aren't work requirements. These are red tape requirements,' Jeffries said this week on the What A Day podcast. 'These are paperwork requirements that are trying to deny people … who have earned the benefits. … Republicans are trying to find ways to disqualify them.' Democrats now plan to use the new regulations against a party that has long championed less red tape and regulation for businesses. 'No amount of cynicism or shameless spin will change the fact that more Republican red tape will result in 17 million people losing their health insurance — and we will make these frauds own that reality for the next 15 months,' said Justin Chermol, a spokesperson for the Democratic campaign committee tasked with taking back the House. The political messaging from Beshear and others turns conventional political wisdom — that Democrats favor a bigger government and Republicans are against red tape — on its head, said Donald Moynihan, professor at the University of Michigan's Ford School of Public Policy. 'This is a case where conventional wisdom fails,' Moynihan said. 'In fact, Republicans are much more supportive of a larger, more intrusive government — when it comes to accessing safety net benefits, you have to provide more information, you have to provide it more frequently, you have to spend more of your life interacting with bureaucracies.' He added: 'For a long time, that paradox or contradiction was not clear in the way it has become very clear with the passage of the Big Beautiful Bill. It has just become harder and harder for Republicans to say, 'We are the party of small government.'' Beshear, who has now won two competitive gubernatorial campaigns and may run for president in 2028, said he is now urging his administration to 'use every bit of information we have to ensure those who qualify for Medicaid stay on it' and to find ways to 'help people fill out that paperwork right.' Politically, however, the governor said he thinks this additional red tape on Americans is part of a broader Democratic messaging strategy aimed at countering the newly signed bill, one that he hopes will focus on real people's stories. 'When you remove health care from at least 200,000 Kentuckians, people die, people suffer,' said Beshear. He added later, 'People are going to lose their coverage because they fail to check this box or that box, and that is just wrong.' Republicans in Congress are showing openness to a sanctions bill against Russia for dragging its feet to make peace in Ukraine. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) told reporters yesterday that he would take up the issue with Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-South Dakota) next week. Trump has strengthened the push for sanctions by making his frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin increasingly obvious, as we wrote about yesterday. He said he was open to a bill by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) that would sanction the country's energy and defense industries and impose a hefty 500 percent tariff on any country that buys Russian energy. The bill has wide support across the Senate, with 80 co-sponsors. The United States already imposed sanctions on Russia following its 2022 invasion of Ukraine and encouraged allies to diversify away from Russian energy. Several European countries, including Germany, were heavily reliant on Russian natural gas before the invasion but have made efforts to wean themselves off it. China and India are both still large consumers of Russian energy. Trump, once again, falsely claimed that gasoline costs $1.99 a gallon in multiple states and accused his opponents of lying about price increases during his second term in office. 'Yesterday, … two states, three states were selling gasoline at $1.99. You haven't seen that for a long time,' Trump said during a meeting with African leaders at the White House. 'I brought costs way down, just about every cost. I can't think of a cost that went up.' Then, referring to his opponents, Trump added: 'So what they do is they lie and say prices are going up. It's such a lie.' There is zero evidence that any state is selling gas at $1.99 a gallon. According to the AAA Fuel Prices metric, the lowest average gas price can be found in Mississippi at $2.705. The average price nationwide is $3.162. We asked the White House which three states Trump was referring to but did not receive a response. Some have noted that Trump may be referring to the wholesale price of gas, but even that price is higher than $1.99, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Is the race to be the next Democratic presidential nominee heating up? Yes, it's early. Yes, people are still tired from 2024. And yes, Democrats have a lot to focus on in opposing Trump. But, also yes, things seem to be heating up. Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, often mentioned as a possible 2028 Democratic candidate, will travel to Iowa next month. He plans to visit with voters at the famed Iowa State Fair, a frequent stop for presidential candidates, and hold a town hall with Iowa Democrats. While Iowa has fallen out of favor with Democrats in recent years, trips to the state often stoke presidential speculation. Gallego even touted the visit with a polished hype video, featuring resplendent footage of barns and corn and people chanting the senator's name, all set to Queen's 1977 hit, 'We Will Rock You.' California Gov. Gavin Newsom, another Democrat who may run, made a visit Tuesday to South Carolina, the state that led off the Democratic nominating process in 2024. 'I think it's really important for Democrats that we spend time in parts of our states, parts of our country, that frankly, we haven't spent enough time in, and so that's why I'm here,' Newsom said during his trip. Our colleague Maeve Reston tracked Newsom across South Carolina and found Democrats excited, but also worried, about another Californian at the top of their presidential ticket. There are ages between now and the 2028 presidential election, but the possible contenders are already making moves. Minnesota Reformer (Minnesota): Preppers are an interesting, yet growing, bunch, and they will be gathering soon in Minnesota. This shirt is worth the click alone: 'Noah was a conspiracy theorist … then it rained.' LebTown (Lebanon County, Pennsylvania): Rep. Dan Meuser, a Pennsylvania Republican, announced he will not run for governor in 2026, declining to challenge popular Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro. Atlanta Journal Constitution (Atlanta): Can you hear the ripeness in a watermelon? Is this why people are always knocking on watermelons in the grocery store? And, as the story asks, should you pat or slap? The Dallas Morning News (Dallas): Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said yesterday that he would convene a special session of the state legislature to respond to the devastating flooding in Texas and, among other things, to raise the possibility of redistricting the state's congressional delegation as Republicans fight to hold their House majority. We wanted to say thank you for responding to our questions about the local media you would like to see featured in our newsletter. We even included one suggestion above! Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. What do you think of the award? Is there someone you feel should receive the honor? Let us know what you think at earlytips@ Thanks for reading. You can follow Dan and Matthew on X: @merica and @matthewichoi.
