Politics

(WASHINGTON) — Senators at last agreed via voice vote early Friday morning to approve a funding package that funds the Department of Homeland Security besides Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and part of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) — a critical step toward ending most of the 42-day long DHS shutdown.

Agencies that would be funded by the Senate’s approved package include TSA, FEMA, The Coast Guard and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

The vote was called by Sen. Bernie Moreno, who was presiding over the chamber just after 2 a.m. ET on Friday morning. The bill will now head to the House where it will need to be approved. If passed, it will then head to the desk of President Donald Trump who would need to sign it for it to become law.

In remarks on the Senate floor early Friday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said he was proud of Democrats who “held the line” on their objection to funding ICE and CBP without reforms.

“Democrats held firm in our position that Donald Trump’s rogue and deadly militia should not get more funding without serious reforms and we will continue to fight for those reforms,” Schumer said.
The package the Senate approved does not include funding for ICE and parts of CBP, though those agencies will continue to receive funds due to the influx of cash in the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill.

Also absent from the package are any of the reforms to ICE’s operating procedures that Democrats have been repeatedly demanding since the debate over DHS funding began.

Majority Leader John Thune lambasted Democrats on the floor for what he framed as their refusal to negotiate in good faith. He said Democrats could have secured some of their desired reforms if they hadn’t complicated negotiations.

“We could be standing here right now passing a funding bill with a list of reforms if the Democrats had made the smallest effort to actually reach an agreement. But they didn’t, because it’s now clear to everyone, Democrats didn’t actually want a solution, they wanted an issue, politics over policy, self-interest over reform, pandering to their base over actually solving a problem,” Thune said. “It’s an appalling commentary on the state of the Democratic Party.”

Schumer was asked by reporters about how Democrats would get reforms from this point going forward.

“We’re going to continue to fight hard for reforms, there’ll be opportunities,” Schumer said, though he provided no detail.

Though there was an effort by Republicans tonight to unanimously pass annual funding for ICE, it was blocked by Democrats.

Republicans are vowing to work on a package later this year to approve even more funding for ICE and CBP, saying they aim to do it using reconciliation — a budget tool that, if successful, would allow them to sidestep Democratic objection and pass the bill without any Democratic support.

Republicans are already warning that that bill will be a much harsher and Sen. Eric Schmitt vowed it would “supercharge deportations.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Thursday insisted Iran is “begging to make a deal” to end the war amid seemingly tenuous indirect talks between the U.S. and Tehran.

“I mean, I read a story today that I’m desperate to make a deal. I’m not,” the president said during a meeting of his Cabinet at the White House.

“I’m the opposite of desperate, I don’t care … In fact, we have other targets we want to hit before we leave. We’re hitting them on a daily basis,” Trump added.

Trump also revealed the “very big present” from Iran he said earlier this week was a sign talks were progressing: 10 oil tankers were allowed safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz.

“I say they’re lousy fighters, but they’re great negotiators,” he said of the Iranians.

 “And they are begging to work out a deal,” Trump said. “I don’t know if we’ll be able to do that. I don’t know if we’re willing to do that.”

White House special envoy Steve Witkoff confirmed during Thursday’s meeting that the U.S. presented Iran with a 15-point framework for a peace deal by way of Pakistan.

Witkoff did not provide any specifics on what is in the proposal, though sources previously told ABC News it addressed Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs as well as maritime routes.

“I can say this, we will see where things lead and if we can convince Iran that this is the inflection point with no good alternatives for them other than more death and destruction,” Witkoff said. “We have strong signs that this is a possibility, and if a deal happens, it will be great for the country of Iran, for the entire region and the world at large.”

Iran responded to the plan through intermediaries overnight, according to the semi-official Tasnim news agency, which quoted an informed source. Reuters reported that according to a senior Iranian official, Iran’s initial response to the U.S. proposal was that it was “one-sided and unfair.”

The administration now ramping up pressure on Iran to agree to a diplomatic off-ramp.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt warned on Wednesday: “President Trump does not bluff, and he is prepared to unleash hell. Iran should not miscalculate again.”

President Trump earlier Thursday told Iran to “get serious, before it is too late.”

The first indication of new talks came from President Trump on Monday, as he announced he was postponing major attacks he’d threatened on Iran’s energy infrastructure for five days — until Friday — due to what he said were “very strong talks.”

Trump was asked Thursday about the status of that deadline, and whether it would be pushed back.

“I don’t know yet. I don’t know,” Trump said. He later added, “And we have a lot of time. You know what? It’s a day. In Trump time, a day, you know what it is, that’s an eternity.”

Hours later, Trump posted on social media that he was pushing the deadline to April 6.

“As per Iranian Government request, please let this statement serve to represent that I am pausing the period of Energy Plant destruction by 10 Days to Monday, April 6, 2026, at 8 P.M., Eastern Time. Talks are ongoing and, despite erroneous statements to the contrary by the Fake News Media, and others, they are going very well,” his post read.

Involved in negotiations are Witkoff, Jared Kushner, Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, according to Trump.

Vance, during Thursday’s Cabinet meeting, emphasized the importance of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and warned that there are “further military options” possible. 

The U.S. is continuing to send thousands more U.S. troops to the Middle East, and the Pentagon is seeking $200 billion in supplemental funding as the conflict continues.

With the conflict in its fourth week, President Trump on Thursday continued to repeat the four-to-six-week timeline he estimated at the onset of the conflict and said the operation is “ahead of schedule.”

Trump said the war will “end soon” and once again referred to it as an “excursion” and a “little detour.”

Trump and his top officials have changed their rhetoric over the course of the conflict, first calling it a “war” but more recently calling it a “military operation.”

Trump acknowledged that inconsistency in remarks at the annual National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) dinner on Wednesday night. He said the change was because of concerns that Congress has not authorized military action.

“I won’t use the word war, because they say if you use the word war, that’s maybe not a good thing to do. They don’t like the word war because you’re supposed to get approval. So, I’ll use the word military operation, which is really what it is,” the president said.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) —  The Pentagon is preparing to surge as many as 5,000 troops to the Middle East — with some forces already in transit, according to two U.S. officials.

It’s a mix of Army paratroopers and Marines.

Among them are some 1,500 paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division, the Army’s premier ground combat unit based out of Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

There are also two Marine units likely headed to the region, according to the two U.S. officials.  

The Airborne unit is designed to deploy on short notice and seize contested terrain by parachuting out of airplanes behind enemy lines.

But that doesn’t necessarily mean they would jump out of planes for a mission. The last time the 82nd Airborne parachuted into combat was the invasion of Panama in 1989. Before that, they did four jumps in World War II.

It’s unclear where the troops will land or when they will arrive. It’s likely they would flow into established U.S. hubs such as Jordan or Kuwait.

Additionally, Marine forces are already moving into position, the officials said. The 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, a 2,200-strong crisis response force, is slated to reach the Middle East this week after a transit by sea from Japan, according to the two officials.

Another Marine unit, the 11th MEU — also a 2,200-strong force — has begun sailing from California toward Japan and could ultimately be redirected to the Middle East as part of the buildup, the officials said. But any contribution from that force would take weeks to materialize because of time taken to get to that part of the world by ship.

The Marines and paratroopers are apart of “light infantry” units, meaning they are not arriving with any notable arsenal of heavily armored vehicles such as tanks.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Conservatives from across the country will descend on Texas this week for the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), one of the largest gatherings for Republicans in the year.

But the yearly gathering comes during a fraught time for the party as the ongoing war with Iran has split some of President Donald Trump’s MAGA followers.

And for the first time in nearly a decade, Trump will not attend the event. A White House official told ABC News that Trump could not attend due to his schedule and the ongoing conflict in Iran.

Vice President JD Vance, who spoke at the gathering last year, is also not listed as a speaker.

Since the war began in February, notable Trump allies have publicly broken from him over the conflict. Most recently, former National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent resigned over his opposition to the war, making him the highest-profile administration official to step down over the issue.

Other MAGA allies, such as Tucker Carlson and former Trump adviser Steve Bannon, have spoken out against the war.

Bannon, who will speak at CPAC, said on his “War Room” podcast this month that if the war becomes “a hard slog,” it could cost the GOP voters before November’s midterm elections.

“We’re going to bleed support,” Bannon said at the time.

In an interview with Piers Morgan earlier this month, Carlson said the Iran war was a “betrayal” to Trump’s supporters.

“Breaking faith with those people, those voters, the ones who actually got Trump elected and whose coalition promised a new day in American politics, that’s a big deal. It’s a betrayal on the level that I don’t think people who aren’t in those groups can understand, like, this is heartbreak. This is heartbreaking,” Carlson said.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who is widely seen as a potential 2028 presidential candidate and has been supportive of the war, is also scheduled to speak at the gathering.

A Quinnipiac poll released Tuesday found that a little more than half — 54% — of voters oppose the U.S. military action in Iran, while 39% support it.

But 86% of Republicans overall support Trump’s military action while 92% of Democrats and 64% of independents oppose it, according to the Quinnipiac poll.

CPAC occurs this year as the midterm primaries are underway and comes ahead of the bitter Texas Senate Republican primary runoff between Sen. John Cornyn, who has held his seat since 2002, and state Attorney General Ken Paxton, which Trump hasn’t yet made an endorsement in.

Paxton is slated to address Friday’s Ronald Reagan Dinner, while Cornyn is not scheduled to speak.

Other notable GOP candidates attending the event include former Republican National Committee Chair Michael Whatley, who’s running for retiring GOP Sen. Thom Tillis’ seat in North Carolina, and businessman Nate Morris, who is running for retiring Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell’s seat in Kentucky.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(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.

(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.

(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.

(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.

(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.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Strikes continued across the Middle East on Tuesday amid uncertainty over the state of talks between the U.S. and Iran, after President Donald Trump touted progress on negotiations while Tehran denied any dialogue.

Just days after he insisted there was no leadership left to talk to in Iran, Trump on Monday announced the U.S. and Iran held discussions over the weekend and as a result he was postponing major attacks he’d threatened on Tehran’s energy infrastructure.

“We have had very, very strong talks,” Trump told reporters. “We’ll see where they lead. But we have … major points of agreement.”

Steve Witkoff, White House special envoy, and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, led the talks for the U.S. side, according to Trump. Trump did not identify who the U.S. was negotiating with in Iran, but said it is not the new supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei.

Trump said a meeting would take place “soon.”

Iran, on the other hand, publicly denied any talks have taken place. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s speaker of Parliament, said Trump’s claims were an attempt to influence markets suffering from Iran’s stranglehold on the Strait of Hormuz.

The Trump administration is not confirming if and when in-person talks will take place between U.S. and Iranian officials in the coming days.

“These are sensitive diplomatic discussions, and the United States will not negotiate through the press. This is a fluid situation, and speculation about meetings should not be deemed as final until they are formally announced by the White House,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement provided to ABC News.

Pakistan has positioned itself as a mediator between the U.S. and Iran.

A Pakistani official familiar with the negotiations told ABC News that there are “several proposals” floating around regarding the next steps for talks and said an in-person meeting in Islamabad is on the table.

Trump on Tuesday shared to his social media platform a post from Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who wrote on X: “Pakistan welcomes and fully supports ongoing efforts to pursue dialogue to end the WAR in the Middle East, in the interest of peace and stability in region and beyond.”

“Subject to concurrence by US and Iran, Pakistan stands ready and honoured to be the host to facilitate meaningful and conclusive talks for a comprehensive settlement of the ongoing conflict,” Sharif’s post read.

The Pakistani official said Turkey and Egypt are also helping to facilitate the talks between the U.S. and Iran.

The official said the talks would likely take place within the next five days in accordance with Trump’s social media post — suggesting military strikes on Iranian power plants were “paused” for the next five days as Tehran and Washington engage in diplomatic negotiations. The official cautioned nothing is final as of yet.

A spokesperson for the Embassy of Pakistan in Washington declined to comment. The Egypt and Turkish embassies have not responded to requests for comment.

The Turkish foreign minister said last Thursday that his country was talking to both the U.S. and Iran to understand where the two nations stand.

The State Department referred to the White House when asked if Witkoff, Kushner and Vice President JD Vance were expected to travel to Islamabad later this week to meet with Iranian officials, as Reuters has reported. Vance’s office has not responded to a request for comment.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday said he had spoken with Trump, and said Trump believes there “is an opportunity to leverage the tremendous achievements we have attained with the U.S. military to realize the war’s objectives in an agreement — an agreement that will safeguard our vital interests.”

In the meantime, Netanyahu said Israel will “continue to strike both in Iran and in Lebanon. We are crushing the missile program and the nuclear program, and continue to inflict severe blows on Hezbollah.”

President Trump earlier Monday said that Israel would be “very happy” when asked if he believed Israel would abide by a negotiated peace deal.

Meanwhile, thousands more U.S. Marines and several Navy ships are heading to the Middle East, and the Pentagon is seeking $200 billion in supplemental funding.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.