U.S. Customs and Border Protection removes Club World Cup post amid FIFA concerns
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) authority has removed a controversial social media post highlighting its upcoming security presence around the upcoming Club World Cup after direct contact from FIFA expressing concerns.
Last Friday, the CBP announced on its Facebook page and other social channels that its agents would be 'suited and booted ready to provide security for the first round of games' while noting that the tournament begins at Miami's Hard Rock Stadium this Saturday.
Advertisement
According to sources familiar with the conversations, speaking anonymously due to their sensitive nature, the post, which attracted thousands of interactions, was deleted after senior personnel from FIFA expressed concerns to the CBP about the reaction it had provoked.
With President Trump's administration having made deportations and a clampdown on illegal immigration key objectives, the post sparked a wave of media and public attention, heightening concerns that fans may be deterred from attending gamers due to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and CBP presence.
Following contact from FIFA, CBP removed the post. It is unclear the extent to which FIFA's outreach influenced the decision to remove the post, but this episode shows that FIFA are becoming concerned about the potential perception for fans attending the tournament both this year and at next year's World Cup.
FIFA declined to comment when approached by The Athletic.
In a statement sent to The Athletic on Wednesday morning, a CBP Spokesperson said: 'U.S. Customs and Border Protection is committed to working with our local and federal partners to ensure the FIFA Club World Cup is safe for everyone involved, as we do with every major sporting event, including the Super Bowl. Our mission remains unchanged.'
Thomas Kennedy of the Florida Immigrant Coalition told South Florida's NBC6 previously that the messaging used by the CBP in the post was 'a bit cryptic, it's sort of alluding that people should have their paperwork in order to attend the games.' Kennedy added that it may make potential fans 'less likely to come watch the games because of just sheer intimidation.'
CBP professionals are sometimes present at major sporting events, according to the organization, in order to help detect and respond to threats and criminal activity. The organization's Air and Marine Operations will also be involved to enforce temporary flight restrictions around stadiums during matches.
Advertisement
ICE agents will also be at Club World Cup games, as part of the overall security operation.
FIFA president Gianni Infantino brushed the controversy aside earlier this week, telling reporters: 'No, I don't have any concerns about anything in the sense that we are very attentive on any security question, of course the most important for us is to guarantee security for all the fans who come to the games, this is our priority.'
FIFA has taken active steps to boost its promotional efforts for the opening games after the initial uptake of tickets was slow.
Local college students in the Miami area have been given the opportunity to buy five tickets for just $20 for Saturday's clash between Lionel Messi's Inter Miami and Egyptian club Al-Ahly.
(Michael Owens – FIFA/FIFA via Getty Images)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
16 minutes ago
- Forbes
Volunteer Track The $10 Billion Blow To American Science
Thousands of research grants issues by the NIH and NSF have been terminated under the Trump ... More administration In early 2025, as reports of mass grant terminations at NIH and NSF rippled across the scientific community, two researchers stepped in to provide what was missing: a comprehensive, verifiable record of what was being lost. Noam Ross, an ecologist and data scientist, began digging through government databases to see whether the terminations could be tracked. Scott Delaney, an epidemiologist and lawyer, opened a public spreadsheet to crowdsource reports from affected scientists. Their efforts soon merged into what is now the most comprehensive public record of science funding terminations in the United States: Grant Watch. Grant Watch is a volunteer-run effort to track the termination of federal research grants, specifically those issued by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF). Since its inception, the project has compiled data on nearly 4,000 grants. According to Grant Watch's most recent weekly report, NIH alone accounts for approximately $3.2 billion in 'lost funding'—defined as funding awarded but not paid out due to terminations. However, Ross estimates that across both NIH and NSF, the total value of terminated grants exceeds $10 billion, including both already-spent funds and future support that will no longer be realized. Roughly half of that amount represents sunk costs for work already begun; the other half consists of future funding that will now never materialize. The economic value of basic research is substantial: federal science funding consistently yields returns that far exceed its costs. In that sense, it is one of the rare public investments that effectively pays for itself. If the current budget proposal is enacted, the estimated $10 billion in terminated grants would translate into significantly greater losses in future productivity, innovation, and economic growth. The scope of the terminations is unprecedented, and that is what prompted Ross, Delaney and their colleagues to start collecting data. 'We sort of stumbled into doing this. Scott and I, and not just us, each started something independently and somewhat joined forces. Suddenly we have a code base and a website, a growing team and a Signal hotline, and now it was cited by a federal judge from the bench.' What began as spreadsheets and amateur sleuthing now underpins lawsuits from organizations like the ACLU, feeds investigative reporting by national news outlets like the Atlantic and the New York Times, and has been cited in federal court filings. The team—which also includes data scientists Anthony Barente and Emma Mairson and a growing team of volunteers—gathers information from public databases, whistleblowers, and grant recipients themselves, who can submit documentation through web forms. They vet each case, verify grant IDs and award data, and attempt to match submissions with official government records. Selected NIH grants identified by Grant Watch as terminated, excerpted from the complaint filed in ... More American Public Health Association et al. v. National Institutes of Health et al., U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts (Case No. 1:25-cv-10787, filed April 2, 2025). The group operates without institutional funding. 'We are in some conversations with funders to just get enough to bring in someone for a day and a half a week to help with back-end database and website maintenance stuff, so we can focus on more investigations and outreach. But so far no one has paid for anything,' Ross said. Ross, who also works on infectious disease forecasting and serves as executive director of rOpenSci, a project that focuses on improving the R programming language, sees Grant Watch as a kind of data journalism project—one that enables rather than replaces traditional reporting. 'We can't tell all the try to present the information as richly and with as much context as possible so that others can.' That model is working. In just a few months, Grant Watch has become an essential resource for understanding the rapid dismantling of American scientific infrastructure. While official agency reports are often incomplete or internally contradictory, Grant Watch cross-references its data, flags discrepancies, and updates entries as new information becomes available. When asked why anyone should trust the data that Grant Watch is producing, Ross replied: 'My first and favorite reason is that scientists are very quick to tell us if we are wrong about their stuff. We have made mistakes, but we've been told immediately about them every time.' Despite its technical complexity, the project is ultimately motivated by a basic civic concern: transparency. The federal government is not just reducing science budgets; it is actively terminating grants, in some cases midstream, without clear justification or process. The result is not only the loss of valuable research but also a profound disruption to the scientific enterprise itself—students without funding, labs disbanded, data lost. And while the political motivations remain murky, the operational reality is plain to see. As Ross put it: 'We can't tell all the stories. But we can make sure no one can say they didn't know.'
Bloomberg
17 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Everyone Is Watching Donald Trump:G-7 Leaders Guide
Group of Seven leaders are heading to a mountain resort in the Canadian Rockies this weekend for their first gathering since Donald Trump returned to the White House. Last time Canada hosted the G-7 summit in 2018, Trump blew up the final communique after departing on Air Force One and called former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau 'very dishonest & weak.' This year, Israel's attack on Iranian nuclear sites threatens to crowd out well-laid plans efforts to make progress on trade and security.
Associated Press
17 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Finding a strong candidate for governor in Pennsylvania may help GOP protect its US House majority
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Job No. 1 for Republicans in Pennsylvania is to scrounge up a candidate to contest next year's reelection bid by Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro — if only to run interference for other Republicans on the ballot who are clinging to seats in Congress. In other words, the unalluring mission of next year's Republican gubernatorial nominee could be just to not get blown out by the relatively popular incumbent. That's because a lopsided victory by Shapiro could otherwise doom Republicans up and down Pennsylvania's ballot — and, with them, the GOP's narrow majority in the U.S. House that backs President Donald Trump's agenda. That's one more reason Pennsylvania could again find itself at the center of attention, even during the midterms and even if the GOP faces long odds against beating Shapiro. Democrats are targeting four GOP-held congressional seats in Pennsylvania alone — more than in any other state — and they need to flip only three seats nationwide to retake the majority they lost last year. Having a valuable standard-bearer is important, analysts say. That is the candidate who often sets the tone for the party in the state, delivers the party's message and drives the enthusiasm of the party's faithful to go out and vote. Republicans had Trump atop their ticket in 2024, and he proved formidable in Pennsylvania. Next year, it will be Democrats with a familiar name leading the way, and he, too, brings considerable heft. Shapiro has won three statewide races, is working to sustain his robust public approval ratings and carries a reputation as a disciplined messenger and powerhouse fundraiser who is on the party's shortlist for top White House contenders in 2028. He'll run at what could be a difficult time for Republicans. During a midterm election, the party of the president — in this case, Trump — typically loses seats in what pollsters describe as a political readjustment by an electorate that tends to punish the status quo. 'The big question I have is, 'Would you as a Republican thinking about this office want to choose 2026 as the time you want to make that run?'' said Christopher Borick, a pollster and director of the Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion. 'You're thinking, 'Well I want to be governor,' but you're thinking, 'I have to first take on a well-funded incumbent who's never lost a race in the state, and I have to do it in a period where my party is facing headwinds.'' The four Republican congressmen in Pennsylvania being targeted by Democrats are Rob Bresnahan, Brian Fitzpatrick, Ryan Mackenzie and Scott Perry. Fitzpatrick and Perry are survivors of repeated challenges. Bresnahan and Mackenzie are freshmen. Fitzpatrick is one of just three House Republicans nationally to represent a district won by Democrat Kamala Harris in last year's presidential election. He won by 13 percentage points. But Perry, Bresnahan and Mackenzie each won by 1.6 percentage points or less, putting their victories among the narrowest of 2024. Those victories came without political headwinds on a GOP ticket led by Trump, who carried battleground Pennsylvania by nearly 2 percentage points. Plus, Republicans lost a slew of seats in Pennsylvania the last two times an incumbent Democratic governor ran for reelection in midterms with a Republican president. There's also this to consider: Shapiro won all four districts when he won his 2022 contest by almost 15 percentage points. Republicans would rather forget that election, when the party nominated a relative political novice who ran an insular, ham-handed campaign — and got blown out. It's going to be 'super-important' for Republicans' down-ballot races to have a strong top-of-the-ticket candidate, said Bob Salera, a Republican campaign strategist who has worked on campaigns for governor in Pennsylvania. But, Republicans acknowledge, Shapiro enters the race from a position of strength. 'He's turning into a national figure, so he'll have all the money possible at his disposal to win in 2026,' Salera said. 'He's a formidable candidate, for certain, and it'll take a formidable Republican to beat him.' Defeating Shapiro is obviously the GOP's preference. But a competitive race could at least protect other Republicans and damage Shapiro's popularity in Pennsylvania enough to pay dividends in the next presidential contest. 'Josh Shapiro is a fairly strong candidate,' said Bill Bretz, the GOP chair of heavily Republican Westmoreland County. 'He's someone we need to identify the chink in the armor here and need to set back his candidacy for governor so that we can set him back in 2028.' In any case, it's a little early for that conversation, Bretz said. No Republican has declared a candidacy for the GOP nomination, and, for now, only two say they're considering it. One is U.S. Rep. Dan Meuser, who hails from a Trump-friendly congressional district in northeastern Pennsylvania. At Trump's rally at a U.S. Steel plant earlier this month, Trump singled out Meuser in the crowd and said nice things about him. 'He's been a great congressman, and if you run, you have my support totally, and you'll win,' Trump said. Meuser said he'll decide by July 1. The other is state Treasurer Stacy Garrity, a two-time statewide winner who has campaigned for other Republicans all over Pennsylvania but has raised only a fraction of the money Shapiro did while winning two low-profile races. All told, Democrats have put a target on 35 Republican-held House districts, needing to flip just three to transform a 220-215 majority into a minority. All four of the targeted Republicans in Pennsylvania voted last month for Trump's big tax cut and spending bill, helping it pass by one vote — a vote that Democrats say will cost them. For his part, Shapiro smashed Pennsylvania's campaign spending record in 2022, and he's running for reelection in a state that's friendly to incumbent governors. Shapiro's most recent public approval ratings resemble those of a candidate who'll cruise to reelection, said Berwood Yost, a pollster and director of the Center for Opinion Research at Franklin and Marshall College. Shapiro unified the party and its allies behind his candidacy in 2022, after winning two statewide elections for attorney general. Shapiro has ably managed the levers of state government and avoided any major scandal. He has raised his profile nationally, including making Harris' shortlist of vice presidential running mates, and kept his grip on party unity. For a candidate to run against Shapiro, there aren't many incentives, Yost said. Timing can be everything in a successful — or unsuccessful — political career, he said. 'You never know what's going to happen, but you're signing up for something you know will be incredibly challenging,' Yost said. 'You have to wonder, if you're an ambitious politician, timing is important. 'Maybe you wait this one out. There's always another statewide race.' ___ Follow Marc Levy on X at:
