US moved over 1,000 refugees to base in Doha almost 2 years ago. Now it’s been targeted

US moved over 1,000 refugees to base in Doha almost 2 years ago. Now it’s been targeted
US moved over 1,000 refugees to base in Doha almost 2 years ago. Now it’s been targeted
Sgt. Juan Miranda, culinary specialist, 155th Combat Sustainment Support Battalion, files in Afghan Special Immigrants into the dining facility, August 20, 2021 at Camp As Sayliyah, Qatar. (Sgt. Jimmie Baker/US Army via Getty Images)

(NEW YORK) — More than 1,100 Afghan refugees and family members of active duty U.S. military personnel are stranded on an unused Doha military base that has become a target since the start of the U.S.-Israel war with Iran, according to U.S. non-profit organization Afghan Evac.

Qatar Armed Forces have been intercepting incoming attacks from Iran, but residents at the facility, known as Camp As Sayliyah, told ABC News they have been hiding in buildings during the attacks and were not initially given bunkers or proper protections to take cover.

During those weeks, they said shrapnel would fall into their bedrooms, even locations where young children were. Since the war broke out, refugees sent ABC News recordings in secret, outlining what they say are the dire conditions at the camp. They asked for their faces to be hidden and their voices altered, due to their fear of being deported or reprimanded.

Three weeks later, ABC News received videos where residents show how the camp installed new concrete walling near the entrances and exits of buildings. They say workers urge residents to enter the bunkers in the “event of a duck and cover alert.”

In response to the residents’ claims of terrible conditions, a spokesperson for the a U.S. State Department, which administers the base, also told ABC News they are “addressing all related operational concerns” including “the safety and security of American citizens as well as the safety of residents at Camp As Sayliyah.”

Mahidewran, a young Afghan mother, told us that her child’s first steps were taken in the camp, where the family has been for more than a year, and that raising her child there has been difficult.

“I’m not always able to provide her with the foods she needs or the toys she loves,” she said.

Her daughter was about to turn 1 when they were initially brought to Camp As Sayliyah, and now she is turning 2.

Apart from raising a child on a former military base, she faces another unlikely challenge: war.

Mahidewran told ABC News sirens go off every few hours in the camp, warning residents to take cover in their buildings.

“I left [Afghanistan] through a legal process by the United States, and when they transferred me to Qatar, we were given safety, an opportunity to rebuild our lives,” she told ABC News.

Ahmad, who said he fought against terrorism alongside the U.S. as a member of the Afghan Command forces, told ABC News his son sleeps under the bed, fearing for his life as missiles continue to fire at the camp.

He said he’s been living at Camp As Sayliyah with his children for more than 18 months, and despite being brought to Doha by the U.S. government, his entire family remains in limbo, not knowing where they will go next. ABC News spoke to refugees who shared similar stories to Ahmad’s — saying they were promised a better life in return for risking theirs when working for the U.S. government.

From July to August 2021, the U.S. evacuated more than 100,000 people out of Afghanistan during Operation Allies Refuge, following the withdrawal of U.S. troops during the Biden-Harris administration.

Nearly five years later, the Trump administration has halted relocation and refugee resettlement efforts, impacting many of those who had already been vetted and cleared to travel to the U.S., according to AfghanEvac. The reports detailing the operation have since been deleted from the State Department website.

Refugees at Camp As Sayliyah said that the U.S. government’s promise of a better life on American soil was broken and that being caught in another war brings them back to the terrifying moments they experienced in Afghanistan.

“We came from a country that was under war for 48 years, before living here we were living in constant fear and anxiety,” Farishta, a teenager living on the base with her parents, told ABC News.

When ABC News spoke with Farishta, she said she was still living in a state of fear and that a worker at the camp threatened her with deportation to Afghanistan if she spoke to a journalist again.

Farishta said she has lived at Camp As Sayliyah for 15 months and often dreams of her future, hoping to further her education.

“I feel hopeless because I am a girl who has been deprived of education and whose future is uncertain,” she said.

“Afghan Nationals at the camp do not currently have a viable pathway to the United States,” the department said.

The plan is to relocate the population to a third country by March 31, according to the department. It said this “is a positive resolution that provides safety for these remaining people to start a new life outside of Afghanistan.”

The State Dept said the “Trump administration has no plans to send these” Afghan refugees back to their home country.

However, those people ABC News spoke to said they have not been told what country they would be going to or when.

Afghan Evac said it has been advocating for refugees at the camp, writing several letters to the State Department, urging the government not to leave the residents at Camp As Sayliyah behind.

According to Afghan Evac, 800 of the people at the camp are fully vetted and approved refugees who were cleared to travel to the U.S. The camp’s residents are mainly women and children, it said.

Shawn VanDiver, the president of Afghan Evac, claimed that there was a pathway and that the State Department closed it off.

“There is no structural or legal barrier preventing these individuals from coming from the United States. The absence of a ‘viable pathway’ is a policy choice, not an inevitability,” he told ABC News.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

First lady Melania Trump enters White House summit with walking, talking humanoid robot

First lady Melania Trump enters White House summit with walking, talking humanoid robot
First lady Melania Trump enters White House summit with walking, talking humanoid robot
U.S. first lady Melania Trump enters the East Room with a humanoid robot during the Fostering the Future Together Global Coalition Summit at the White House. (Heather Diehl/Getty Images)

(WASHINGTON) — First lady Melania Trump was joined by a special guest at the White House on Wednesday: a walking, talking humanoid robot.

Named “Figure 03,” the shiny black and white robot strolled side by side with Mrs. Trump into the East Room for the second day of her international technology summit, where she is hosting spouses of leaders from 45 nations and representatives from 28 tech companies.

The robot, developed by the company Figure, welcomed guests in multiple languages and offered a wave.

“I’m Figure 03, a humanoid built in the United States of America,” it said. “I am grateful to be part of this historic movement to empower children with technology and education.”

The robot then turned and walked back down a White House corridor out of the room.

“It’s fair to state, you are my first American-made humanoid guest in the White House,” the first lady quipped after its exit.

The first lady launched her “Fostering the Future Together” initiative in September at the United Nations General Assembly.

She and other first spouses, like France’s first lady Brigitte Macron, spoke on Wednesday about the importance of balancing the use of tech with safety and the need for initiatives to equip young people with practical skills.

“Our mission to empower children through technology and education is achievable. I encourage each of you to take a proactive step after this inaugural summit. Pledge to host a regional meeting. Collaborate with the private sector. Unlock access to tech for those who require assistance, draft groundbreaking legislation to protect our children,” Mrs. Trump said. “Collaborate with another member nation. Form a committee and be a catalyst for discovery.”

“Indeed, our world is transforming, and through the use of AI, we can now access centuries worth of human humanities knowledge base. The future of AI is personified. It will be formed in the shape of humans,” she added.

The first lady kicked off the inaugural meeting of first spouses and dignitaries on Tuesday with remarks delivered at the State Department. A working session followed focused on the topics of artificial intelligence, education technology, digital literacy and skills, and safety and protection online.

Olena Zelenska, the first lady of Ukraine, and Sara Netanyahu, wife of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, are among the first spouses present.

Zelenska said she was joining Mrs. Trump’s initiative as a reliable partner, and spoke about Ukraine’s investment in digital infrastructure, education technologies and AI-enabled learning.

“For us, this is the matter of principle. No child, no adult, should lose access to education regardless of their circumstances. That is why we’re building a comprehensive digital education ecosystem,” Zelenska said. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Jury finds YouTube, Meta negligent in landmark social media trial

Jury finds YouTube, Meta negligent in landmark social media trial
Jury finds YouTube, Meta negligent in landmark social media trial
Two teenagers look at their iPhone screens displaying various social media and messaging apps. (Anna Barclay/Getty Images)

(LOS ANGELES) — In a landmark decision, a jury found Meta and YouTube negligent for designing apps that harmed kids and teens and failed to warn them about the dangers.

The jury awarded compensatory damages in the amount of $3 million. The jury also found punitive damages are warranted.

The lawsuit, brought by a 20-year-old woman identified as “Kaley,” alleges major social media companies intentionally designed their platforms to be addictive. The suit claims features like auto-scrolling got the plaintiff addicted to the platforms, ultimately leading to anxiety, depression and body image issues.

In a statement to ABC News, a Meta spokesperson said “We respectfully disagree with the verdict and are evaluating our legal options.”

The plaintiff’s attorney called the verdict “bigger than one case,” in a statement to ABC News.

In a statement to ABC News, a Meta spokesperson said “We respectfully disagree with the verdict and are evaluating our legal options.”

The plaintiff’s attorney called the verdict “bigger than one case,” in a statement to ABC News.

“For years, social media companies have profited from targeting children while concealing their addictive and dangerous design features,” the attorney continued. “Today’s verdict is a referendum — from a jury, to an entire industry — that accountability has arrived. We now move forward to the next phase of this trial focused on punitive damages.”

The damages were found to be 70 percent the responsibility of Meta and 30 percent the responsibility of YouTube.

The jury returned an answer of “Yes” to every question posed relating to negligence and failure to warn of dangers. Ten jurors were in favor of the plaintiff for every question, with two in favor of the defense in every question.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Venezuelan migrant sues Trump administration over deportation to notorious CECOT prison

Venezuelan migrant sues Trump administration over deportation to notorious CECOT prison
Venezuelan migrant sues Trump administration over deportation to notorious CECOT prison
The entrance of the Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) that is located t the municipality of Tecoluca, in San Vicente, El Salvador, on October 12, 2023. (Alex Pena/Anadolu via Getty Images)

(NEW YORK) — A Venezuelan migrant who was deported from the United States to El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison last year has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, alleging he was wrongfully removed without due process.

Attorneys for Neiyerver Adrián Leon Rengel say their client’s removal violated his rights.

“Through a series of unconstitutional and ultra vires acts by high-ranking federal officials and law enforcement officers, Plaintiff Neiyerver Adrián Leon Rengel was wrongly identified as a member of the gang Tren de Aragua, repeatedly denied due process, falsely imprisoned, intentionally deceived, and — ultimately — illegally sent to El Salvador in blatant violation of a court order,” the lawsuit filed on Tuesday states.

Rengel is one of more than 250 Venezuelan nationals released to their home country from CECOT in a prisoner swap last July, after being removed from the U.S. under the Alien Enemies Act, an 18th century wartime authority used to remove noncitizens with little-to-no due process.

The Trump administration deported two planeloads of alleged migrant gang members to the El Salvador prison by arguing that the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua is a “hybrid criminal state” that is invading the United States.

Rengel is seeking $1.3 million in damages.

According to the complaint, Rengel presented himself at a U.S. port of entry several years ago, complied with all immigration requirements, and was awaiting an immigration hearing that was set for 2028.

“On the morning of his birthday, March 13, 2025, while he was headed to work, Plaintiff was caught in the Administration’s scheme and would soon experience the full force of its unconstitutional and unlawful policies,” the complaint states. “At the time of his arrest, the only justification offered by ICE officers was that Plaintiff’s tattoos indicated his membership in TdA. Plaintiff immediately rebutted that identification, as he has never had any affiliation with TdA or any other gang.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security disputed the allegations in the suit.

“Neiyerver Adrian Leon Rengel entered our country illegally in 2023 from Venezuela and is an associate of Tren De Aragua. This illegal alien was deemed a public safety threat as a confirmed associate of the Tren de Aragua gang and processed for removal from the U.S.,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

“We hear far too much about gang members and criminals’ false sob stories and not enough about their victims,” the statement said. “We are confident in our law enforcement’s intelligence, and we aren’t going to share intelligence reports and undermine national security every time a gang member denies he is one.”

Rengel was held at the Salvadoran prison for four months. During that time, he alleges he was beaten by guards, denied medical care, and held without contact with his family or legal counsel.

“These conditions and the physical abuse inflicted on Plaintiff were the direct, proximate result of the decisions of federal officials who placed and maintained him in constructive U.S. custody at CECOT, and they constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment,” the complaint states.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Supreme Court deals blow to music industry fight against illegal downloads

Supreme Court deals blow to music industry fight against illegal downloads
Supreme Court deals blow to music industry fight against illegal downloads
U.S. Supreme Court building on Wednesday, March 18, 2026. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that internet service providers cannot be held liable for illegal downloads of copyrighted material like music, movies, and TV shows simply because some of their customers are known to engage in piracy.

The unanimous decision reversed a $1.5 billion damages award to Sony Music Entertainment in a suit against Cox Communications, the third largest broadband provider in the U.S., in a setback for the entertainment industry’s efforts to crack down on rampant, illicit distribution of copyrighted material online.

“Cox provided Internet service to its subscribers, but it did not intend for that service to be used to commit copyright infringement,” wrote Justice Clarence Thomas in the court’s opinion. “Holding Cox liable merely for failing to terminate Internet service to infringing accounts would expand secondary copyright liability beyond our precedents.”

Copyright owners had insisted that the risk of being sued creates an incentive for internet service providers to help root out online piracy and suspend the accounts of those suspected of dealing in protected material.

The victory for Cox effectively blunts entertainment industry efforts to root out online piracy by leveraging service providers. It had warned that a contrary ruling could have forced them into bankruptcy and potentially eliminated internet access entirely in some communities.

Federal law makes it a crime to directly infringe on a copyright, but secondary liability by another party involved in copyright infringement — such as internet service providers — remains an evolving area of law.

As a general rule, anyone who “materially contributes to the infringing conduct of another may be held liable as a contributory infringer,” lawyers for the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), an entertainment industry trade group, argued in a brief to the high court.

Thomas said the court rejects that view.

“The provider of a service is contributorily liable for the user’s infringement only if it intended that the provided service be used for infringement,” he wrote. “The intent required for contributory liability can be shown only if the party induced the infringement or the provided service is tailored to that infringement.”

Nearly 19 billion downloads of pirated movies and TV shows were made using online peer-to-peer software in 2023, according to the MPAA. The copyright violations cost the U.S. economy more than $29 billion and “hundreds of thousands of jobs,” the group estimates.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson concurred in the judgment of the court but said they would not have imposed as stringent limits on liability.

“Instead of artificially limiting secondary liability, the Court should have examined whether some other rule of fault-based liability derived from the common law might hold Cox liable for copyright infringement committed on its network,” Sotomayor wrote.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Savannah Guthrie gives 1st interview since Nancy Guthrie’s abduction: ‘We are in agony’

Savannah Guthrie gives 1st interview since Nancy Guthrie’s abduction: ‘We are in agony’
Savannah Guthrie gives 1st interview since Nancy Guthrie’s abduction: ‘We are in agony’
Savannah Guthrie and mother Nancy Guthrie on Thursday, June 15, 2023 — (Photo by: Nathan Congleton/NBC via Getty Images)

(NEW YORK) — “Today” show host Savannah Guthrie is speaking out in her first interview nearly two months after her mother, Nancy Guthrie, was kidnapped from her Tucson, Arizona, home.

Authorities say Nancy Guthrie, 84, was abducted from her house in the early hours of Feb. 1. They have released surveillance images from outside Nancy Guthrie’s house, but the person who took her remains unidentified.

In an emotional interview with her friend and former co-host Hoda Kotb, Savannah Guthrie said, “We are in agony.”

“It is unbearable,” she said. “And to think of what she went through.”

Savannah Guthrie said thoughts of the terror her mother experienced wakes her up each night.

“I wake up every night in the middle of the night. Every night,” she said through tears. “And in the darkness, I imagine her terror. And it is unthinkable. But those thoughts demand to be thought. And I will not hide my face. That she needs to come home now.”

“Someone needs to do the right thing,” she stressed.

The full interview with Savannah Guthrie will be released on Thursday and Friday, Kotb said.

Kotb has been filling in for Savannah Guthrie on “Today” since the abduction.

Anyone with information is urged to call 911, the FBI at 1-800-CALL-FBI, or the Pima County Sheriff’s Department at 520-351-4900.

ABC News’ Matt Claiborne contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Democrat flips seat representing Mar-a-Lago’s district in Florida special election

Democrat flips seat representing Mar-a-Lago’s district in Florida special election
Democrat flips seat representing Mar-a-Lago’s district in Florida special election
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters and members of the media at Mar-a-Lago on February 1, 2026 in Palm Beach, Florida.(Photo by Al Drago/Getty Images)

(WASHINGTON) — Democrat Emily Gregory won the Florida House District 87 special election, according to The Associated Press, flipping the district that includes President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. 

In the Tuesday evening upset victory, Gregory was reported to have defeated Trump-endorsed Republican Jon Maples by about 2.4 percentage points, according to the AP.

The Democrat’s victory came after the president, who had endorsed Maples, himself cast a mail-in ballot, according to public records, despite his years-long criticism of voting by mail.

He turned to his social media platform on Monday to encourage voters to support Maples, calling the statehouse race a “very important” special election and emphasizing its location in Palm Beach County, where he spends much of his winter and just visited this past weekend.

“Jon is a very successful Businessman and Civic Leader, who is known and loved, and also endorsed by so many of my Palm Beach County friends,” the president added.

Democrats were celebrating the flip as a major accomplishment leading into the midterms, while also touting the symbolic significance of a victory on the president’s home turf.

“Mar-a-Lago just flipped red to blue, which should have Republicans sweating the midterms,” Heather Williams, president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, said in a statement. “A Trump +11 district in his own backyard shouldn’t be in play for Democrats, but tonight proves Republicans are vulnerable everywhere.”

Williams also projected a positive outlook heading into the midterms, saying “If Mar-a-Lago is vulnerable, imagine what’s possible this November.”

“This victory reiterates an undeniable trend in Florida: with year round organizing and infrastructure investment, Democrats can run and win anywhere–including Donald Trump’s backyard,” Florida Democratic Party Chair Nikki Fried said in a statement.

Gregory, who is a small business owner and public health professional, told MS Now on Tuesday night that she still felt “pretty shocked” by the victory and that she didn’t think “much” about the president being one of her constituents.

Trump is “one of 115,000 registered voters in district 87,” she said. “My opponent made, you know, him forefront in his campaign. And I focused more on the voters in district 87, you know, what everybody needs. What all of us will do better with … lower property insurance, with expanded healthcare, and with strong public schools.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

2 arrested in connection with London arson attack on Jewish charity’s ambulances, police say

2 arrested in connection with London arson attack on Jewish charity’s ambulances, police say
2 arrested in connection with London arson attack on Jewish charity’s ambulances, police say
Firefighters at the scene in Highfield Road, Golders Green, London, after an apparent arson attack on four ambulances belonging to the Jewish Community Ambulance service in London. The Metropolitan Police confirmed the incident is being treated as an antisemitic hate crime. Picture date: Monday March 23, 2026. (Photo by Jonathan Brady/PA Images via Getty Images)

(LONDON) — Two men were arrested in connection with an arson attack on a Jewish charity’s ambulances in the north London neighborhood of Golders Green, British police said on Wednesday.

The men — aged 47 and 45 — were taken into custody Wednesday morning at separate addresses in northwest and central London, police said.

Both were arrested on suspicion of arson with intent to endanger life and have been taken to a London police station where they’re being held, according to London’s Metropolitan Police Service, which noted that its officers are conducting searches at the two addresses.

Four ambulances used by Hatzola, a volunteer-led ambulance service in north London, were set on fire just about 1:30 a.m. on Monday morning, police said. Three masked or hooded individuals were seen setting the fires, police said.

Investigators said that they were combing through hours of CCTV footage related to the case, in part to “trace the suspects’ movements.”

“This appears to be an important breakthrough in the investigation, but we’re also mindful that CCTV footage of the incident suggests there were at least three people involved,” Cmdr. Helen Flanagan, Head of Counter Terrorism Policing London, who is leading the investigation, said in a statement.

An investigations was still underway, Flanagan added, saying the Met would “seek to arrest all of those who may have been involved.”

Officials said that the arson attack was being treated as an antisemitic hate crime, although it had not as been designated a terrorist incident as of the police’s most recent update, which was published on Monday.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer described the attack as “horrifying,” saying on social media on Monday that it appeared to be a “shocking antisemitic arson attack.”

“An attack on our Jewish community is an attack on us all,” Starmer said. “We will fight the poison that is antisemitism.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Supreme Court poised to let Trump turn away asylum seekers at border

Supreme Court poised to let Trump turn away asylum seekers at border
Supreme Court poised to let Trump turn away asylum seekers at border
The Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., March 18, 2026. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images)

(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court appears poised to allow President Trump to turn away asylum seekers who approach ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexico border, a decision which would reverse a lower court ruling that the policy likely violates federal law and international treaties.

A majority of the court’s conservative justices signaled during oral arguments in the case Tuesday that the administration should have broad leeway over border control and that asylum seekers who have not yet stepped foot on U.S. soil probably do not have a legal right to file a claim seeking protection.

“Do you think someone who comes to the front door of a house and knocks at the door has arrived ‘in’ the house?” Justice Samuel Alito asked. “The person may have arrived ‘at’ the house.”

Immigrant advocates insist the Immigration and Nationality Act, which says a noncitizen who “arrives in the U.S. … at a designated port of arrival” must be allowed to apply for asylum, includes those who have “reached the threshold” of America.

“If an immigration officer determines that an alien who is arriving in the United States has expressed a fear of future persecution, then the immigration officer shall refer them for a credible fear interview,” argued Kelsi Corkran, an attorney supporting asylum seekers.

From the start of his second term, Trump has effectively blocked the entry of all noncitizens at the southern border, including those seeking to apply for refuge from credible fears of violence and persecution.

“You can’t ‘arrive in’ the U.S. while you’re still standing in Mexico,” argued Assistant Solicitor General Vivek Suri. “It is entirely lawful for the executive branch to prevent aliens from reaching U.S. soil and claiming those protections.”

The dispute largely turns on competing interpretations of what it means to “arrive in” the country.

“How close do you have to be to the border?” asked Justice Amy Coney Barrett. “If it’s not crossing the physical border, what is the magic thing or the dispositive thing that we’re looking for where we say, ah, now that person we can say arrives in the United States?”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested that regardless of where the line is drawn, the law stipulates that the government can prevent people from filing an asylum claim if it wants to. “The government’s presumably going to stop you on the other side of that line and prevent you from getting to wherever the line is. Right?” he asked.

The court’s three liberal justices were critical of the Trump administration’s interpretation of the law.

“Imagine a polite asylum seeker who wants to do everything by the book,” posited Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. “He approaches the border but does not cross, precisely because the law says you are not supposed to enter the U.S. without authority. Why on earth would Congress have intended or meant for his asylum request to be discarded, not taken seriously, not entertained, but someone who manages to enter the U.S. unlawfully…and requests asylum gets their application entertained? “

“That doesn’t seem to me to make any sense,” Jackson added.

At the heart of the case is the so-called “turn back” policy from Trump’s first term that kept asylum seekers waiting in Mexico as a method of “metering” access at border crossings that faced overcrowding. Border officials contend it was a temporary policy, imposed only when conditions required.

While the administration voluntarily discontinued the practice in 2021 after a lower court deemed it unlawful, the government now wants the justices to approve the ability to reinstate the policy if necessary. Trump has invoked alternate legal authorities to support his current border crackdown.

Melissa Crow, director of litigation at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, an immigrant rights group representing several asylum-seeker plaintiffs, said a ruling for the administration could have a major impact, even if not immediate.

“We have no doubt the administration is seeking a decision that will give them even more leeway to restrict the rights of people seeking asylum,” Crow said.

Tens of thousands of asylum seekers who arrived at the U.S. southern border during Trump’s first term were forced to remain in Mexico for weeks or months in sometimes harrowing conditions in hopes they might have a chance to be interviewed about their fears of persecution.

Nicole Ramos, border rights project director at Al Otro Lado, an immigrant rights group and plaintiff in the case, says Congress had a more nuanced view when it drafted the law following the U.S. failure to accept Jewish refugees from the Holocaust.

“The right to seek asylum at the border is a legal right and a moral right,” Ramos said. “The stakes are not theoretical. They are measured in lives.”

One of those lives was Benito, a Mexican asylum seeker who declined to give his last name to protect his identity and spoke through a translator at an event hosted by Al Otro Lado.

“I was partially tortured, had a lot of lesions, and emotional harm, and traumas and I’m still healing from that,” he said of the violence he was trying to escape. “I knew I could apply for asylum in that moment, on the side of Mexico, and so I did everything correctly. I came close; I told the [U.S.] immigration agents that I needed to apply for asylum because I was scared and thought I would be killed.

“I had scars on my body, on my face, and my head,” he said, “but they said to me that they couldn’t help me, couldn’t accept me.”

The court is expected to issue a decision on the Trump administration’s bid to resurrect the “metering” and “turn back” policy by the end of June.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Doctors say Pfizer’s Lyme disease vaccine trial results ‘encouraging’ after more than 70% efficacy shown

Doctors say Pfizer’s Lyme disease vaccine trial results ‘encouraging’ after more than 70% efficacy shown
Doctors say Pfizer’s Lyme disease vaccine trial results ‘encouraging’ after more than 70% efficacy shown
Pfizer logo (Photo Illustration by Nikolas Kokovlis/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

(NEW YORK) — Earlier this week, pharmaceutical company Pfizer and its partner Valneva announced that an experimental Lyme disease vaccine showed more than 70% efficacy in late-stage clinical trials.

The candidate, PF-07307405, showed 73.2% efficacy in reducing confirmed cases of Lyme disease cases after the fourth and final dose was administered when compared to a placebo.

However, the companies said there were fewer than anticipated cases of Lyme disease during the trial period and the study missed an important benchmark.

The trial did not reach its primary endpoint to provide an idea of how the results of this vaccine would turn out in a much larger population of people. Only with re-analyzing the data were researchers able to generate a statistically meaningful result.

Experts in tick-borne diseases told ABC News they still need to see the full data from the trials and that it’s early to determine what kind of impact the vaccine will have — but they add that results are “encouraging.”

“There are many other companies that are trying to develop something, but those are years and years and years away from being anywhere close to being marketed,” Dr. Gene Shapiro, a professor of pediatric infectious diseases and epidemiology of microbial diseases, told ABC News. “So, this vaccine was very similar to the vaccine that we know worked in the past. I think we have to pay attention to [this new one].”

Lyme disease is a bacterial infection that is spread through the bite of blacklegged ticks, also known as deer ticks, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Symptoms include fever, headache, fatigue and a skin rash known as erythema migrans, the CDC says. If left untreated, the infection can spread to joints, the heart and the nervous system.

More than 89,000 cases of Lyme disease were reported to the CDC by state health departments and the District of Columbia in 2023, according to the latest data available from the federal health agency. Estimates suggest about 476,000 Americans may be diagnosed and treated for Lyme disease annually.

Currently, no vaccine for Lyme disease is available in the U.S. Previously, a vaccine was available, but it was discontinued in 2002, according to the CDC.

“The uptake was poor. The sales were poor, and the company decided to stop selling it,” Shapiro said. “The currently developed vaccine [by Pfizer and Valneva] is very, very similar to that vaccine, with very minor modifications.”

Dr. Martin Becker, a clinical associate professor in the department of medicine at NYU Grossman Long Island School of Medicine, added that there were concerns raised, including about vaccine recipients having joint problems but several studies examining a link failed to find an association.

Becker said there have been many clinical trials underway but this one that Pfizer just announced, I believe, is the one that’s been most advanced,” he told ABC News. “We were eagerly awaiting results from this large Phase III trial. Other previous trials were already published showing the safety and immunogenicity [of the vaccine].”

Pfizer and Valneva said they are planning to file for approval with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, with Pfizer telling ABC News that the trial results show there is a level of protection against Lyme disease.

“It doesn’t mean it doesn’t work, but it does mean — if we had higher numbers of incidence of infection — we would be more confident about the degree of protection. It’s very encouraging,” Becker said.

Questions remain about whether the vaccine, if approved, will have higher uptake than the previous vaccine did decades earlier.

Shapiro said there might be more uptake with this vaccine if stronger recommendations are made. At the time the old vaccine was approved by federal regulators, Shapiro said the recommendation from the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices was to consider the shot for those at higher risk, but it was not recommended for those at low or no risk.

“It was not a very strong recommendation,” Shapiro said. “And I think there was less awareness of Lyme disease. So, most likely, [the newer vaccine] would get a stronger endorsement today.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.