The airline’s notice did not specify the duration of the restriction or provide detailed justification, but the move comes against the backdrop of escalating geopolitical frictions in the region.

Separately, the website of budget carrier Flydubai indicated that Iranian nationals holding a valid UAE “Golden Visa” are exempt from the restriction and remain eligible to enter and transit the country.

The exemption suggests that long-term residency status continues to be recognized despite broader entry limitations.Neither Emirates nor Flydubai immediately issued additional statements clarifying operational details, including whether the restrictions apply uniformly across all routes or are subject to further regulatory guidance.

The UAE authorities have not publicly outlined a comprehensive policy announcement accompanying the airline updates. However, aviation advisories and carrier-level restrictions are often aligned with government directives during periods of regional instability.

The measures coincide with rising tensions involving Iran and neighboring states, which have increasingly affected aviation routes, airspace usage, and cross-border mobility. Airlines operating in the Gulf have in recent years adjusted policies in response to security concerns, diplomatic developments, and regulatory changes.

It remains unclear how many passengers may be affected by the restriction or whether additional carriers operating to the UAE will adopt similar measures.

The case centers on Trump’s order, signed after his return to the White House, which would deny automatic U.S. citizenship to children born on American soil to parents residing illegally or temporarily in the country.

Federal courts previously halted the measure, citing the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which grants citizenship to nearly all individuals born in the United States.

The administration argues that the 14th Amendment, ratified after the Civil War, was intended to secure citizenship rights for formerly enslaved people and does not extend to children of undocumented migrants or temporary visa holders.

In filings, Solicitor General John Sauer contended that eligibility for citizenship requires both birth in the United States and being “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” a phrase the administration interprets narrowly.

Lower courts rejected that interpretation, relying on longstanding precedent, including the 1898 Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which affirmed citizenship for a U.S.-born individual of foreign parents.Legal scholars cited in the proceedings said the court’s historical reliance on precedent may weigh against the administration’s position.

Steven Schwinn, a law professor at the University of Illinois Chicago, said the court has traditionally looked to historical practice in constitutional interpretation.Trump confirmed he would attend the hearing, marking a rare instance of a sitting president observing oral arguments in a case involving their own administration.

While presidents have historically maintained distance from court proceedings, Trump has previously attended judicial ceremonies, including the 2017 investiture of Justice Neil Gorsuch.

The Supreme Court currently has a 6–3 conservative majority, with three justices appointed by Trump during his first term.The administration has argued that automatic citizenship for children of undocumented migrants acts as an incentive for illegal immigration and so-called “birth tourism.”

Opponents, including the American Civil Liberties Union, said the policy would undermine constitutional protections and create uncertainty over the citizenship status of millions of Americans.

The case follows a separate setback for Trump in February, when the Supreme Court struck down much of his global tariff policy. Trump criticized that ruling and renewed his attack on judicial decisions ahead of the current hearing.

A decision on the birthright citizenship case is expected by late June or early July.

Unpaid federal employees have called out from duty, leaving reduced screening capacity at major airports, including Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, where travelers faced hours-long waits, according to accounts from passengers attempting to reach destinations such as Washington.

The disruption has driven some travelers to rail alternatives, including overnight services operated by Amtrak. The Crescent line, connecting the southeastern United States to Washington, has seen increased reliance from passengers seeking certainty amid airport congestion.

Rail stations reported fewer delays tied to security processing, with passengers boarding closer to departure times and avoiding bottlenecks associated with the Transportation Security Administration, which has been affected by staffing shortages during the shutdown.

The budget standoff, rooted partly in disputes over immigration enforcement funding, has also drawn in agencies such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which remains central to the administration’s policy agenda.

The partial shutdown has left gaps in federal operations, including airport screening, highlighting vulnerabilities in essential travel infrastructure when government funding lapses.

The shift toward rail underscores long-standing structural dynamics in U.S. transportation, where policy, subsidies and political priorities have historically shaped the balance between rail, road and air travel.

While air travel remains the dominant mode for long-distance domestic journeys, the current disruption has revived reliance on legacy rail networks, particularly along the East Coast corridor linking major urban centers.

The Senate reached a bipartisan proposal to fund most of the Department of Homeland Security, excluding immigration enforcement, but House Republican leaders rejected the measure, prolonging the impasse and its effects on national mobility.

Large crowds gathered in major cities including New York, Washington, Dallas and Los Angeles, while organizers said nearly two-thirds of events took place in smaller communities, marking a sharp expansion beyond urban centers.

The protests come months ahead of November’s midterm elections that will determine control of Congress.The rallies, the third in a series since last year, follow earlier demonstrations that drew millions of participants. Organizers linked the surge in turnout to opposition against Trump’s immigration crackdown, U.S. involvement in the Iran conflict, and broader concerns over democratic institutions.

In St. Paul, Minnesota, a key focal point amid immigration enforcement tensions, thousands gathered outside the state capitol. Governor Tim Walz told demonstrators their actions reflected “compassion” and “democracy,” while Senator Bernie Sanders warned against what he described as a drift toward authoritarianism.

In New York, actor Robert De Niro, one of the rally organizers, addressed a crowd stretching across multiple city blocks, saying no previous U.S. president had posed a comparable threat to civil liberties.

Musician Bruce Springsteen performed at the Minnesota event, debuting a protest ballad criticizing federal immigration actions.Participants cited a range of concerns, including deportation policies and recent military operations involving Iran.

Demonstrators in Washington gathered on the National Mall with pro-democracy slogans, while smaller groups, including elderly residents in Maryland, staged roadside protests urging resistance to what they termed “tyranny.”In Dallas, clashes broke out between demonstrators and counterprotesters, including a group linked to Enrique Tarrio.

Police reported several arrests after minor scuffles and street blockages.Authorities in Los Angeles also detained multiple individuals after protesters refused to disperse near a federal facility, with law enforcement deploying tear gas after objects were thrown.

Democratic support for the protests, describing them as extreme, while organizers defended the rallies as peaceful expressions of dissent.political stakes riseThe protests coincide with declining approval ratings for Trump, which fell to 36 percent, the lowest level since his return to office, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll.

Organizers say participation is rising even in traditionally Republican states, signaling broader political engagement ahead of the midterms.Leah Greenberg, co-founder of the Indivisible movement that organized the protests, said suburban districts critical to national elections are seeing heightened activity, reflecting growing mobilization among opposition voters.

The demonstrations were also framed by organizers as a response to ongoing military action involving Iran, now in its fourth week, adding a foreign policy dimension to domestic unrest.

Trump announced the move in a social media post, citing a need to end what he called “chaos at the airports,” while lawmakers worked overnight to pass a measure that would fund most DHS operations but exclude immigration enforcement agencies central to the political dispute.

The Senate approved the funding deal unanimously without a roll call vote, sending the measure to the House of Representatives for consideration later on Friday.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said the agreement would allow much of the government to reopen, though negotiations would continue on unresolved issues.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer criticized the delay, saying the agreement could have been reached earlier and reiterating demands for reforms tied to immigration enforcement funding.

The White House had considered invoking emergency powers to pay TSA workers during the shutdown. Instead, Trump’s order will direct payments using funds from a 2025 tax law, according to a senior administration official.

The funding package covers agencies such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Coast Guard, but leaves out Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection, reflecting the core disagreement between Republicans and Democrats over immigration policy.

Travel disruptions mountThe prolonged funding lapse has led to significant operational strain at U.S. airports, with rising absenteeism among TSA staff who have missed paychecks.

Government data showed more than 11% of scheduled TSA workers were absent on Wednesday, with some airports reporting callout rates exceeding 40%.Nearly 500 of the agency’s roughly 50,000 transportation security officers have resigned during the shutdown, exacerbating delays and raising concerns about airport operations nationwide.

Union officials welcomed the move to pay TSA employees but urged Congress to pass a comprehensive funding agreement to stabilize DHS operations and ensure all federal workers are compensated.

The filings, tied to long-running litigation over migrant child detention standards, detail conditions at the Dilley detention facility, where children and families faced virus outbreaks and extended lockdowns in December and January.

Lawyers and monitors said conditions remained concerning even as the number of detained children declined in recent weeks.Under standards stemming from the Flores settlement, children are generally not to be held in custody for more than 20 days.

However, government data cited in the filings showed that about 595 children were detained beyond that limit during December and January.Of those, approximately 265 were held for more than 50 days and 55 for over 100 days, according to the documents.

This marked an increase from a prior disclosure indicating around 400 children exceeded the limit between August and September.Lawyers argued that prolonged detention, combined with reported deficiencies in care, risked worsening physical and psychological harm among minors.

Attorneys and advocacy groups cited cases of inadequate medical treatment, poor food quality and limited access to legal counsel. One filing described a 13-year-old girl who attempted self-harm after being denied prescribed antidepressants and access to her mother.

Government records referenced in the filings stated there had been no placements on suicide watch.Advocates who visited the facility in March said that while the number of detained children had dropped to about 85, systemic issues persisted. Reports also cited the presence of worms in food and insufficient healthcare access.

The case of a young child detained earlier this year drew protests, including demonstrations by detainees within the facility.

The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement that detention standards provide for basic necessities, including adequate food and water, and described detention as a consequence of migration choices.

It added that authorities were working to expedite deportations.The administration of Donald Trump is seeking to end the Flores settlement, arguing it constrains enforcement and imposes costs.

The case is being overseen by Dolly Gee of the Central District of California, with a hearing scheduled later this month to review compliance and conditions.

The court’s brief and unsigned order did not provide reasoning, as is typical in emergency rulings. However, two liberal justices — Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor — issued a sharp dissent. Justice Jackson accused the majority of “botching” the legal balancing test, warning of “devastating consequences” for over 500,000 migrants who now face the threat of deportation.

The Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program had offered a two-year safe haven to people fleeing political turmoil, economic collapse, or natural disasters in their home countries. Critics of the administration’s policy say the sudden revocation could lead to the largest mass removal of legal residents in modern U.S. history.

Economic Impact and Humanitarian Concerns

Advocates and labor unions underscored the critical role these migrants play in the American economy, particularly in essential industries such as healthcare, construction, and manufacturing. At one auto parts factory, nearly one in five workers is reportedly under the TPS program.

“These are people who stepped up to support our economy during national shortages,” said one union representative. “Now the government is pulling the rug from under them.”

City governments and counties that have welcomed TPS holders joined legal challenges, citing potential “severe economic and societal harms” if the deportations proceed.

A Battle Between Executive Power and Judicial Oversight

The Trump administration maintains that the migrants’ continued presence is “against national interests,” and argues that courts have no authority to interfere. The Department of Homeland Security insists that the program, originally expanded by the Biden administration as a deterrent to illegal crossings, has instead backfired — encouraging more arrivals and straining immigration enforcement efforts.

Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, speaking earlier this year at a border security summit in Phoenix, stated that the administration is determined to “restore lawful order and national sovereignty.”

However, federal courts have shown resistance. A district judge in Massachusetts, Indira Talwani, ruled that early termination of TPS protections must be assessed individually, rather than through a mass cancellation. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, temporarily halting the administration’s plan.

The Biden-era policy, now under attack, had sought to stabilize migration patterns by offering legal pathways to those escaping crises — a contrast to Trump’s strategy of swift deportation and tightened border enforcement.

Looking Ahead

Immigration rights groups are expected to continue legal challenges, with the case likely to return to the courts in full. In the meantime, over half a million people now face deep uncertainty about their futures in the U.S.

For families, employers, and communities across the country, the court’s decision marks a pivotal moment in the nation’s immigration debate — one that intertwines humanitarian responsibilities with questions of law, sovereignty, and national identity.